From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1597C2D0C3 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A83B9206CB for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Hr2ixI8B" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A83B9206CB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 273D98E0005; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:33:31 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 223DA8E0003; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:33:31 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 113138E0005; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:33:31 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0183.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.183]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0B358E0003 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:33:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin12.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id A9D2540FB for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:30 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76323714180.12.fall19_16194d81113f X-HE-Tag: fall19_16194d81113f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6996 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by imf35.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1577756008; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+BU8EnvAFQ15SiyK+InKxVY2/QKfob4UUICg/0rQxlk=; b=Hr2ixI8Bd4mHwiXbkgzJ9xXVLJEBx9EeaWZptvye0PFJdc2NCK7NzC+e9kTza4f730hL3M lCovfgrynEdY0VnFZwKMl/9ruseT4a7AIMi3aQQf3CGpwMI1nL7vKMrzmjus/XX92Ebnow /+Ak7WKTZy2Zo3BC2N+PaVbIJq6bGuo= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-223-9I-U1Z06Nn6CXQqW1s8xdQ-1; Mon, 30 Dec 2019 20:33:24 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 9I-U1Z06Nn6CXQqW1s8xdQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A885E18031C3; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-12-53.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.53]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C314410001BD; Tue, 31 Dec 2019 01:33:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 09:33:18 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" Cc: Andrew Morton , Dan Williams , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Mel Gorman , "Jin, Zhi" , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Kirill A. Shutemov" Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: Skip non present sections on zone initialization Message-ID: <20191231013318.GB26758@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> References: <20191230093828.24613-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20191231012345.GA26758@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191231012345.GA26758@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 12/31/19 at 09:23am, Baoquan He wrote: > On 12/30/19 at 12:38pm, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > memmap_init_zone() can be called on the ranges with holes during the > > boot. It will skip any non-valid PFNs one-by-one. It works fine as long > > as holes are not too big. > > > > But huge holes in the memory map causes a problem. It takes over 20 > > seconds to walk 32TiB hole. x86-64 with 5-level paging allows for much > > larger holes in the memory map which would practically hang the system. > > > > Deferred struct page init doesn't help here. It only works on the > > present ranges. > > > > Skipping non-present sections would fix the issue. > > > > Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov > > --- > > > > The situation can be emulated using the following QEMU patch: > > > > diff --git a/hw/i386/pc.c b/hw/i386/pc.c > > index ac08e6360437..f5f2258092e1 100644 > > --- a/hw/i386/pc.c > > +++ b/hw/i386/pc.c > > @@ -1159,13 +1159,14 @@ void pc_memory_init(PCMachineState *pcms, > > memory_region_add_subregion(system_memory, 0, ram_below_4g); > > e820_add_entry(0, x86ms->below_4g_mem_size, E820_RAM); > > if (x86ms->above_4g_mem_size > 0) { > > + int shift = 45; > > ram_above_4g = g_malloc(sizeof(*ram_above_4g)); > > memory_region_init_alias(ram_above_4g, NULL, "ram-above-4g", ram, > > x86ms->below_4g_mem_size, > > x86ms->above_4g_mem_size); > > - memory_region_add_subregion(system_memory, 0x100000000ULL, > > + memory_region_add_subregion(system_memory, 1ULL << shift, > > ram_above_4g); > > - e820_add_entry(0x100000000ULL, x86ms->above_4g_mem_size, E820_RAM); > > + e820_add_entry(1ULL << shift, x86ms->above_4g_mem_size, E820_RAM); > > } > > > > if (!pcmc->has_reserved_memory && > > diff --git a/target/i386/cpu.h b/target/i386/cpu.h > > index cde2a16b941a..694c26947bf6 100644 > > --- a/target/i386/cpu.h > > +++ b/target/i386/cpu.h > > @@ -1928,7 +1928,7 @@ uint64_t cpu_get_tsc(CPUX86State *env); > > /* XXX: This value should match the one returned by CPUID > > * and in exec.c */ > > # if defined(TARGET_X86_64) > > -# define TCG_PHYS_ADDR_BITS 40 > > +# define TCG_PHYS_ADDR_BITS 52 > > # else > > # define TCG_PHYS_ADDR_BITS 36 > > # endif > > > > --- > > mm/page_alloc.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c > > index df62a49cd09e..442dc0244bb4 100644 > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c > > @@ -5873,6 +5873,30 @@ overlap_memmap_init(unsigned long zone, unsigned long *pfn) > > return false; > > } > > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM > > +/* Skip PFNs that belong to non-present sections */ > > +static inline __meminit unsigned long next_pfn(unsigned long pfn) > > +{ > > + unsigned long section_nr; > > + > > + section_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(++pfn); > > + if (present_section_nr(section_nr)) > > + return pfn; > > + > > + while (++section_nr <= __highest_present_section_nr) { > > + if (present_section_nr(section_nr)) > > + return section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr); > > + } > > + > > + return -1; > > +} > > +#else > > +static inline __meminit unsigned long next_pfn(unsigned long pfn) > > +{ > > + return pfn++; > > +} > > +#endif > > + > > /* > > * Initially all pages are reserved - free ones are freed > > * up by memblock_free_all() once the early boot process is > > @@ -5912,8 +5936,10 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone, > > * function. They do not exist on hotplugged memory. > > */ > > if (context == MEMMAP_EARLY) { > > - if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) > > + if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) { > > + pfn = next_pfn(pfn) - 1; > > Just pass by, I think this is a necessary optimization. Wondering why > next_pfn(pfn) is not put in for loop: > - for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn++) { > + for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn=next_pfn(pfn)) { > > > > continue; > > + } > > if (!early_pfn_in_nid(pfn, nid)) > > continue; > > Why the other two 'continue' don't need be worried on the huge hole > case? OK, I see. early_pfn_valid() may have encountered the huge hole case, the check in patch sounds reasonable. FWIW, looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Baoquan He Thanks Baoquan