Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Wed 03-04-13 12:21:32, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:00:49PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> > > index 2b0bcb0..b2e4027 100644
> > > --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> > > +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> > > @@ -705,12 +705,16 @@ void * __init __alloc_bootmem(unsigned long size,
> > > unsigned long align,
> > >
> > > void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(pg_data_t *pgdat,
> > > unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> > > - unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit)
> > > + unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit,
> > > + int zeroed)
> > > {
> > > void *ptr;
> > >
> > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> > > - return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > + if (zeroed)
> > > + return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > + else
> > > + return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > > again:
> > >
> > > /* do not panic in alloc_bootmem_bdata() */
> >
> > You need to update alloc_bootmem_bdata and alloc_bootmem_core as well.
> > Otherwise this is a no-op for early allocations when slab is not
> > available which is the case unless something is broken.
>
> Michal,
>
> Does this do what you would expect?
yes, it looks right when I quickly glanced over it. I haven't checked
deeply yet. I would suggest reposting and adding more *bootmem people
into CC (e.g. Johannes Weiner, Yinghai Lu, Tejun Heo and maybe others).
> I compiled this for ia64, but I have not tested it at all.
>
> Robin
>
> ---
> mm/bootmem.c | 30 +++---
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> index b2e4027..350e0ab 100644
> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> @@ -497,7 +497,8 @@ static unsigned long __init align_off(struct bootmem_data
> *bdata,
>
> static void * __init alloc_bootmem_bdata(struct bootmem_data *bdata,
> unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> - unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit)
> + unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit,
> + int zeroed)
> {
> unsigned long fallback = 0;
> unsigned long min, max, start, sidx, midx, step;
> @@ -584,7 +585,8 @@ find_block:
>
> region = phys_to_virt(PFN_PHYS(bdata->node_min_pfn) +
> start_off);
> - memset(region, 0, size);
> + if (zeroed)
> + memset(region, 0, size);
> /*
>* The min_count is set to 0 so that bootmem allocated blocks
>* are never reported as leaks.
> @@ -605,13 +607,18 @@ find_block:
> static void * __init alloc_bootmem_core(unsigned long size,
> unsigned long align,
> unsigned long goal,
> - unsigned long limit)
> + unsigned long limit,
> + int zeroed)
> {
> bootmem_data_t *bdata;
> void *region;
>
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> - return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available())) {
> + if (zeroed)
> + return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + else
> + return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + }
>
> list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list) {
> if (goal && bdata->node_low_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(goal))
> @@ -619,7 +626,7 @@ static void * __init alloc_bootmem_core(unsigned long
> size,
> if (limit && bdata->node_min_pfn >= PFN_DOWN(limit))
> break;
>
> - region = alloc_bootmem_bdata(bdata, size, align, goal, limit);
> + region = alloc_bootmem_bdata(bdata, size, align, goal, limit,
> zeroed);
> if (region)
> return region;
> }
> @@ -635,7 +642,7 @@ static void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_nopanic(unsigned
> long size,
> void *ptr;
>
> restart:
> - ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit);
> + ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit, 1);
> if (ptr)
> return ptr;
> if (goal) {
> @@ -710,22 +717,23 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(pg_data_t
> *pgdat,
> {
> void *ptr;
>
> - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available())) {
> if (zeroed)
> return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> else
> return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + }
> again:
>
> /* do not panic in alloc_bootmem_bdata() */
> if (lim
Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Wed 03-04-13 12:00:12, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:02:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > index ca9a7c6..7683f6a 100644
> > > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > > @@ -1185,7 +1185,7 @@ int __weak alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h)
> > > while (nr_nodes) {
> > > void *addr;
> > >
> > > - addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(
> > > + addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic_notzeroed(
> > > NODE_DATA(hstate_next_node_to_alloc(h,
> > > &node_states[N_MEMORY])),
> > > huge_page_size(h), huge_page_size(h), 0);
> >
> > Ohh, and powerpc seems to have its own opinion how to allocate huge
> > pages. See arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c
>
> Do I need to address their allocations? Can I leave that part of the
> changes as something powerpc can address if they are affected by this?
I mentioned powerpc basically because I encountered it as the only
alternative implementation of alloc_bootmem_huge_page. I haven't checked
how it does the job and now that I am looking closer it uses memblock
allocator so it would need a separate fix.
I guess you are right saying that this should be handled when the need
arises.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:00:49PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> > index 2b0bcb0..b2e4027 100644
> > --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> > +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> > @@ -705,12 +705,16 @@ void * __init __alloc_bootmem(unsigned long size,
> > unsigned long align,
> >
> > void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(pg_data_t *pgdat,
> > unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> > - unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit)
> > + unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit,
> > + int zeroed)
> > {
> > void *ptr;
> >
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> > - return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > + if (zeroed)
> > + return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > + else
> > + return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> > again:
> >
> > /* do not panic in alloc_bootmem_bdata() */
>
> You need to update alloc_bootmem_bdata and alloc_bootmem_core as well.
> Otherwise this is a no-op for early allocations when slab is not
> available which is the case unless something is broken.
Michal,
Does this do what you would expect? I compiled this for ia64, but I
have not tested it at all.
Robin
---
mm/bootmem.c | 30 +++---
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
index b2e4027..350e0ab 100644
--- a/mm/bootmem.c
+++ b/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -497,7 +497,8 @@ static unsigned long __init align_off(struct bootmem_data
*bdata,
static void * __init alloc_bootmem_bdata(struct bootmem_data *bdata,
unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
- unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit)
+ unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit,
+ int zeroed)
{
unsigned long fallback = 0;
unsigned long min, max, start, sidx, midx, step;
@@ -584,7 +585,8 @@ find_block:
region = phys_to_virt(PFN_PHYS(bdata->node_min_pfn) +
start_off);
- memset(region, 0, size);
+ if (zeroed)
+ memset(region, 0, size);
/*
* The min_count is set to 0 so that bootmem allocated blocks
* are never reported as leaks.
@@ -605,13 +607,18 @@ find_block:
static void * __init alloc_bootmem_core(unsigned long size,
unsigned long align,
unsigned long goal,
- unsigned long limit)
+ unsigned long limit,
+ int zeroed)
{
bootmem_data_t *bdata;
void *region;
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
- return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available())) {
+ if (zeroed)
+ return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
+ else
+ return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
+ }
list_for_each_entry(bdata, &bdata_list, list) {
if (goal && bdata->node_low_pfn <= PFN_DOWN(goal))
@@ -619,7 +626,7 @@ static void * __init alloc_bootmem_core(unsigned long size,
if (limit && bdata->node_min_pfn >= PFN_DOWN(limit))
break;
- region = alloc_bootmem_bdata(bdata, size, align, goal, limit);
+ region = alloc_bootmem_bdata(bdata, size, align, goal, limit,
zeroed);
if (region)
return region;
}
@@ -635,7 +642,7 @@ static void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_nopanic(unsigned long
size,
void *ptr;
restart:
- ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit);
+ ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit, 1);
if (ptr)
return ptr;
if (goal) {
@@ -710,22 +717,23 @@ void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(pg_data_t
*pgdat,
{
void *ptr;
- if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available())) {
if (zeroed)
return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
else
return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
+ }
again:
/* do not panic in alloc_bootmem_bdata() */
if (limit && goal + size > limit)
limit = 0;
- ptr = alloc_bootmem_bdata(pgdat->bdata, size, align, goal, limit);
+ ptr = alloc_bootmem_bdata(pgdat->bdata, size, align, goal, limit,
zeroed);
if (ptr)
return ptr;
- ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit);
+ ptr = alloc_bootmem_core(size, align, goal, limit, z
Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 04:02:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > index ca9a7c6..7683f6a 100644
> > --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> > +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> > @@ -1185,7 +1185,7 @@ int __weak alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h)
> > while (nr_nodes) {
> > void *addr;
> >
> > - addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(
> > + addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic_notzeroed(
> > NODE_DATA(hstate_next_node_to_alloc(h,
> > &node_states[N_MEMORY])),
> > huge_page_size(h), huge_page_size(h), 0);
>
> Ohh, and powerpc seems to have its own opinion how to allocate huge
> pages. See arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c
Do I need to address their allocations? Can I leave that part of the
changes as something powerpc can address if they are affected by this?
Robin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index ca9a7c6..7683f6a 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -1185,7 +1185,7 @@ int __weak alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h)
> while (nr_nodes) {
> void *addr;
>
> - addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(
> + addr = __alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic_notzeroed(
> NODE_DATA(hstate_next_node_to_alloc(h,
> &node_states[N_MEMORY])),
> huge_page_size(h), huge_page_size(h), 0);
Ohh, and powerpc seems to have its own opinion how to allocate huge
pages. See arch/powerpc/mm/hugetlbpage.c
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH] mm, x86: Do not zero hugetlbfs pages at boot. -v2
On Tue 02-04-13 21:43:44, Robin Holt wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/mm/bootmem.c b/mm/bootmem.c
> index 2b0bcb0..b2e4027 100644
> --- a/mm/bootmem.c
> +++ b/mm/bootmem.c
> @@ -705,12 +705,16 @@ void * __init __alloc_bootmem(unsigned long size,
> unsigned long align,
>
> void * __init ___alloc_bootmem_node_nopanic(pg_data_t *pgdat,
> unsigned long size, unsigned long align,
> - unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit)
> + unsigned long goal, unsigned long limit,
> + int zeroed)
> {
> void *ptr;
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(slab_is_available()))
> - return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + if (zeroed)
> + return kzalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> + else
> + return kmalloc(size, GFP_NOWAIT);
> again:
>
> /* do not panic in alloc_bootmem_bdata() */
You need to update alloc_bootmem_bdata and alloc_bootmem_core as well.
Otherwise this is a no-op for early allocations when slab is not
available which is the case unless something is broken.
[...]
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
