From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com, mhocko@suse.com,
kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com, aarcange@redhat.com,
dcashman@google.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm: change find_vma() function
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 23:11:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151214211132.GA7390@node.shutemov.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151214175509.GA25681@redhat.com>
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 06:55:09PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/14, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 07:02:25PM +0800, yalin wang wrote:
> > > change find_vma() to break ealier when found the adderss
> > > is not in any vma, don't need loop to search all vma.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > mm/mmap.c | 3 +++
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mm/mmap.c b/mm/mmap.c
> > > index b513f20..8294c9b 100644
> > > --- a/mm/mmap.c
> > > +++ b/mm/mmap.c
> > > @@ -2064,6 +2064,9 @@ struct vm_area_struct *find_vma(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr)
> > > vma = tmp;
> > > if (tmp->vm_start <= addr)
> > > break;
> > > + if (!tmp->vm_prev || tmp->vm_prev->vm_end <= addr)
> > > + break;
> > > +
> >
> > This 'break' would return 'tmp' as found vma.
>
> But this would be right?
Hm. Right. Sorry for my tone.
I think the right condition is 'tmp->vm_prev->vm_end < addr', not '<=' as
vm_end is the first byte after the vma. But it's equivalent in practice
here.
Anyway, I don't think it's possible to gain anything measurable from this
optimization.
>
> Not that I think this optimization makes sense, I simply do not know,
> but to me this change looks technically correct at first glance...
>
> But the changelog is wrong or I missed something. This change can stop
> the main loop earlier; if "tmp" is the first vma,
For the first vma, we don't get anything comparing to what we have now:
check for !rb_node on the next iteration would have the same trade off and
effect as the proposed check.
> or if the previous one is below the address.
Yes, but would it compensate additional check on each 'tmp->vm_end > addr'
iteration to the point? That's not obvious.
> Or perhaps I just misread that "not in any vma" note in the changelog.
>
> No?
>
> Oleg.
>
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-14 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-14 11:02 yalin wang
2015-12-14 12:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-12-14 17:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2015-12-14 21:11 ` Kirill A. Shutemov [this message]
2015-12-15 6:41 ` yalin wang
2015-12-15 11:47 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2015-12-15 11:53 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2015-12-22 5:31 ` yalin wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151214211132.GA7390@node.shutemov.name \
--to=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dcashman@google.com \
--cc=gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kwapulinski.piotr@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=yalin.wang2010@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox