On 07/04/2013 07:41 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 02:51:18PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
>> Hi Ben,
>> When I test your patch on kernel 3.10, the kernel panic when aio job
>> complete or exit, exactly in aio_free_ring(), the following is a part of
>> dmesg.
>
> What is
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 02:51:18PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> When I test your patch on kernel 3.10, the kernel panic when aio job
> complete or exit, exactly in aio_free_ring(), the following is a part of
> dmesg.
What is your test case?
-ben
--
To unsubscribe
On 07/03/2013 02:00 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
>> Hi Ben,
>> Are you still working on this patch?
>> As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one
>> instance of
>> aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix
On 07/03/2013 02:00 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
Hi Ben,
Are you still working on this patch?
As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one
instance of
aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix this issue?
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 02:51:18PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
Hi Ben,
When I test your patch on kernel 3.10, the kernel panic when aio job
complete or exit, exactly in aio_free_ring(), the following is a part of
dmesg.
What is your test case?
-ben
--
To unsubscribe from
On 07/04/2013 07:41 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 02:51:18PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
Hi Ben,
When I test your patch on kernel 3.10, the kernel panic when aio job
complete or exit, exactly in aio_free_ring(), the following is a part of
dmesg.
What is your test
On 07/03/2013 02:00 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
>> Hi Ben,
>> Are you still working on this patch?
>> As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one
>> instance of
>> aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> Are you still working on this patch?
> As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one instance
> of
> aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix this issue? Or can we use some
> other ones to replace
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
Hi Ben,
Are you still working on this patch?
As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one instance
of
aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix this issue? Or can we use some
other ones to replace the anon
On 07/03/2013 02:00 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:39PM +0800, Gu Zheng wrote:
Hi Ben,
Are you still working on this patch?
As you know, using the current anon inode will lead to more than one
instance of
aio can not work. Have you found a way to fix this issue?
On 06/11/2013 10:45 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> Hi Tang,
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
>> Hi Benjamin,
>>
>> Are you still working on this problem ?
>>
>> Thanks. :)
>
> Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
> on. This
On 06/11/2013 10:45 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
Hi Tang,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Are you still working on this problem ?
Thanks. :)
Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
on. This version works and
On 06/11/2013 10:45 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> Hi Tang,
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
>> Hi Benjamin,
>>
>> Are you still working on this problem ?
>>
>> Thanks. :)
>
> Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
> on. This
On 06/11/2013 10:45 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
Hi Tang,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Are you still working on this problem ?
Thanks. :)
Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
on. This version works and
Hi Tang,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> Are you still working on this problem ?
>
> Thanks. :)
Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
on. This version works and stands up to my testing using move_pages() to
force
Hi Benjamin,
Are you still working on this problem ?
Thanks. :)
On 05/21/2013 10:27 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:07:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
I'm not saying using two callbacks before and after migration is better.
I don't want to use
Hi Benjamin,
Are you still working on this problem ?
Thanks. :)
On 05/21/2013 10:27 AM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:07:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
I'm not saying using two callbacks before and after migration is better.
I don't want to use
Hi Tang,
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Are you still working on this problem ?
Thanks. :)
Below is a copy of the most recent version of this patch I have worked
on. This version works and stands up to my testing using move_pages() to
force the
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:07:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> I'm not saying using two callbacks before and after migration is better.
> I don't want to use address_space_operations is because there is no such
> member
> for anonymous pages.
That depends on the nature of the pinning. For
Hi Benjamin,
Sorry for the late. Please see below.
On 05/17/2013 10:37 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:28:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Thank you very much for your idea. :)
I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
works for
Hi Benjamin,
Sorry for the late. Please see below.
On 05/17/2013 10:37 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:28:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Thank you very much for your idea. :)
I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
works for
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:07:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
I'm not saying using two callbacks before and after migration is better.
I don't want to use address_space_operations is because there is no such
member
for anonymous pages.
That depends on the nature of the pinning. For the
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:17:08AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > I ended up working on this a bit today, and managed to cobble together
> > something that somewhat works -- please see the patch below.
>
> Just some quick observations:
>
> > + ctx->ctx_file = anon_inode_getfile("[aio]",
> I ended up working on this a bit today, and managed to cobble together
> something that somewhat works -- please see the patch below.
Just some quick observations:
> + ctx->ctx_file = anon_inode_getfile("[aio]", _ctx_fops, ctx, O_RDWR);
> + if (IS_ERR(ctx->ctx_file)) {
> +
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:28:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Benjamin,
>
> Thank you very much for your idea. :)
>
> I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
> works for aio subsystem because you changed the way to allocate the aio
> ring pages, with a file
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:28:52AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin,
Thank you very much for your idea. :)
I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
works for aio subsystem because you changed the way to allocate the aio
ring pages, with a file mapping.
I ended up working on this a bit today, and managed to cobble together
something that somewhat works -- please see the patch below.
Just some quick observations:
+ ctx-ctx_file = anon_inode_getfile([aio], aio_ctx_fops, ctx, O_RDWR);
+ if (IS_ERR(ctx-ctx_file)) {
+
On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 11:17:08AM -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
I ended up working on this a bit today, and managed to cobble together
something that somewhat works -- please see the patch below.
Just some quick observations:
+ ctx-ctx_file = anon_inode_getfile([aio], aio_ctx_fops, ctx,
Hi Benjamin,
Thank you very much for your idea. :)
I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
works for aio subsystem because you changed the way to allocate the aio
ring pages, with a file mapping.
So far as I know, not only aio, but also other subsystems, such
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 01:54:18PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
...
> OK, I'll try to figure out a proper place to put the callbacks.
> But I think we need to add something new to struct page. I'm just
> not sure if it is OK. Maybe we can discuss more about it when I send
> a RFC patch.
...
I ended up
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 01:54:18PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
...
OK, I'll try to figure out a proper place to put the callbacks.
But I think we need to add something new to struct page. I'm just
not sure if it is OK. Maybe we can discuss more about it when I send
a RFC patch.
...
I ended up
Hi Benjamin,
Thank you very much for your idea. :)
I have no objection to your idea, but seeing from your patch, this only
works for aio subsystem because you changed the way to allocate the aio
ring pages, with a file mapping.
So far as I know, not only aio, but also other subsystems, such
Hi Mel,
On 05/15/2013 09:24 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
If it is to be an address space operations sturcture then you'll need a
pseudo mapping structure for anonymous pages that are pinned by aio --
similar in principal to how swapper_space is used for managing PageSwapCache
or how anon_vma
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:55:31AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> On 05/13/2013 05:19 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >>For memory hot-remove case, the aio pages are pined in memory and making
> >>the pages cannot be offlined, furthermore, the pages cannot be removed.
> >>
> >>IIUC, you mean
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
On 05/15/2013 10:09 AM, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
Please see below.
On 05/14/2013 09:58 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13,
Hi Mel,
On 05/15/2013 09:24 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
If it is to be an address space operations sturcture then you'll need a
pseudo mapping structure for anonymous pages that are pinned by aio --
similar in principal to how swapper_space is used for managing PageSwapCache
or how anon_vma
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
On 05/15/2013 10:09 AM, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
Please see below.
On 05/14/2013 09:58 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13,
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 11:55:31AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel,
On 05/13/2013 05:19 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
For memory hot-remove case, the aio pages are pined in memory and making
the pages cannot be offlined, furthermore, the pages cannot be removed.
IIUC, you mean implement
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
Please see below.
On 05/14/2013 09:58 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
>
> On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> >On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >>How do you propose to move the ring pages?
> >
> >It's the same problem as doing a TLB
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you propose to move the ring pages?
It's the same problem as doing a TLB shootdown: flush
Hi Benjamin, Mel,
Please see below.
On 05/14/2013 09:58 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 09:24:58AM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you
Hi Mel,
On 05/13/2013 05:19 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
For memory hot-remove case, the aio pages are pined in memory and making
the pages cannot be offlined, furthermore, the pages cannot be removed.
IIUC, you mean implement migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() callbacks in aio
subsystem, and call
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you propose to move the ring pages?
It's the same problem as doing a TLB shootdown: flush the old pages from
userspace's mapping, copy any existing data
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:19:02AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
...
> > If so, I'm wondering where should we put this callback pointers ?
> > In struct page ?
> >
>
> No, I would expect the callbacks to be part the address space operations
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> How do you propose to move the ring pages?
It's the same problem as doing a TLB shootdown: flush the old pages from
userspace's mapping, copy any existing data to the new pages, then
repopulate the page tables. It will likely
Benjamin LaHaise writes:
> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:19:02AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
>> On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> ...
>> > If so, I'm wondering where should we put this callback pointers ?
>> > In struct page ?
>> >
>>
>> No, I would expect the callbacks to
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> On 02/06/2013 05:56 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> >
> >There is the possibility that callbacks could be introduced for
> >migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() that takes a list of PFN pairs
> >(old,new). The unpin callback should
Hi Mel,
On 02/06/2013 05:56 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
There is the possibility that callbacks could be introduced for
migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() that takes a list of PFN pairs
(old,new). The unpin callback should release the old PFNs and barrier
against any operations until the
Hi Mel,
On 02/06/2013 05:56 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
There is the possibility that callbacks could be introduced for
migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() that takes a list of PFN pairs
(old,new). The unpin callback should release the old PFNs and barrier
against any operations until the
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
Hi Mel,
On 02/06/2013 05:56 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
There is the possibility that callbacks could be introduced for
migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() that takes a list of PFN pairs
(old,new). The unpin callback should release the
Benjamin LaHaise b...@kvack.org writes:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:19:02AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
...
If so, I'm wondering where should we put this callback pointers ?
In struct page ?
No, I would expect the callbacks to be
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you propose to move the ring pages?
It's the same problem as doing a TLB shootdown: flush the old pages from
userspace's mapping, copy any existing data to the new pages, then
repopulate the page tables. It will likely require
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:19:02AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 05:11:43PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
...
If so, I'm wondering where should we put this callback pointers ?
In struct page ?
No, I would expect the callbacks to be part the address space operations
which
Hi Mel, Benjamin, Jeff,
On 05/13/2013 11:01 PM, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 10:54:03AM -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
How do you propose to move the ring pages?
It's the same problem as doing a TLB shootdown: flush the old pages from
userspace's mapping, copy any existing data
Hi Mel,
On 05/13/2013 05:19 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:
For memory hot-remove case, the aio pages are pined in memory and making
the pages cannot be offlined, furthermore, the pages cannot be removed.
IIUC, you mean implement migrate_unpin() and migrate_pin() callbacks in aio
subsystem, and call
Hi Wanpeng,
On 02/20/2013 07:37 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> + * This function first calls get_user_pages() to get the candidate pages,
>> and
>> >+ * then check to ensure all pages are from non movable zone. Otherwise
>> >migrate
> How about "Otherwise migrate candidate pages which have already
Hi Wanpeng,
On 02/20/2013 07:37 PM, Wanpeng Li wrote:
+ * This function first calls get_user_pages() to get the candidate pages,
and
+ * then check to ensure all pages are from non movable zone. Otherwise
migrate
How about Otherwise migrate candidate pages which have already been
Hi Mel,
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:17AM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> > > > get_user_pages() always tries
Hi Mel,
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:56:17AM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
get_user_pages() always tries to
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> > > get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which
> > > is not
> > > reliable to
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which
is not
reliable to memory
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
> THP degradation by increasing MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE?
> Lin said most of GUP pages release the page in short so is it really problem?
> Even in embedded, we don't use THP yet but CMA and GUP call would be not too
> often
> but failing of
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> > get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is
> > not
> > reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
> >
> > This patch introduces
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
> get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is
> not
> reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
>
> This patch introduces a new library function called
> get_user_pages_non_movable()
> to pin
get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is not
reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
This patch introduces a new library function called get_user_pages_non_movable()
to pin pages only from zone non-movable in memory.
It's a wrapper of
get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is not
reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
This patch introduces a new library function called get_user_pages_non_movable()
to pin pages only from zone non-movable in memory.
It's a wrapper of
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is
not
reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
This patch introduces a new library function called
get_user_pages_non_movable()
to pin pages
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 12:01:37PM +, Mel Gorman wrote:
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:21:52PM +0800, Lin Feng wrote:
get_user_pages() always tries to allocate pages from movable zone, which is
not
reliable to memory hotremove framework in some case.
This patch introduces a new
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 09:42:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
THP degradation by increasing MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE?
Lin said most of GUP pages release the page in short so is it really problem?
Even in embedded, we don't use THP yet but CMA and GUP call would be not too
often
but failing of CMA
70 matches
Mail list logo
