From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
To: lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [LSF/MM TOPIC]: memory management bits in arch/*
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2019 09:07:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190128070705.GB2470@rapoport-lnx> (raw)
Hi,
There is a lot of similar and duplicated code in architecture specific
bits of memory management.
For instance, as it was recently discussed at [1], most architectures
have
#define GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_ZERO
for allocating page table pages and many of them use similar, if not
identical, implementation of pte_alloc_one*().
But that's only the tip of the iceberg.
I've seen several early_alloc() or similarly called routines that do
if (slab_is_available())
return kazalloc()
else
return memblock_alloc()
Some other trivial examples are free_initmem(), free_initrd_mem() and,
to some extent, mem_init(), but more generally there are a lot of
similarities in arch/*/mm/.
More complex cases are per-cpu initialization, passing of memory topology
to the generic MM, reservation of crash kernel, mmap of vdso etc. They
are not really duplicated, but still are very similar in at least
several architectures.
While factoring out the common code is an obvious step to take, I
believe there is also room for refining arch <-> mm interface to avoid
adding extra HAVE_ARCH_NO_BOOTMEM^w^wWHAT_NOT and then searching for
ways to get rid of them.
This is particularly true for mm initialization. It evolved the way
it's evolved, but now we can step back to black/white board and
consider design that hopefully will avoid problems like [2].
As a side note, it might be also worth looking into dropping
DISCONTIGMEM, although Kconfig still recommends to prefer it over
SPARSEMEM [3].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1547619692-7946-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190114082416.30939-1-mhocko@kernel.org/
[3] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/mm/Kconfig#n49
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next reply other threads:[~2019-01-28 7:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-28 7:07 Mike Rapoport [this message]
2019-02-14 8:37 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=20190128070705.GB2470@rapoport-lnx \
--to=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/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