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=-11.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED 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 B8029C433E0 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 20:11:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BE3F221F8 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 20:11:14 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3BE3F221F8 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 6836D8D0029; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 15:11:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 633768D001C; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 15:11:13 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 521FF8D0029; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 15:11:13 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0041.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.41]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 395F88D001C for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 15:11:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0452C181AC9BF for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 20:11:13 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 77669186826.09.veil97_5612bc6274d3 Received: from filter.hostedemail.com (10.5.16.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.16.251]) by smtpin09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA3FE180AD806 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 20:11:12 +0000 (UTC) X-HE-Tag: veil97_5612bc6274d3 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 5553 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by imf50.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2021 20:11:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1609791071; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=zzb8vPZ5tL+JqIKlDSV+9+O5aQFXZvXFgnRErEP99Qs=; b=U6v/N/bQMJn2sXJtagdbHsx+Bof1HdRsFF1wPaX9723djOqhPbzanf55upCxpjhy5FSJNn FRutZ5TL+ewPYkX2xPBeZfGwYZY21wPQ6sZK8k8fq0xYNycfNVPDlWlXeNtYS4UiiQAav9 1ZuKQBglyFywEOHTtD0aLOuZ5bz+mq0= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-265-96k029mDMnKuebmKz49Dag-1; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:11:10 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 96k029mDMnKuebmKz49Dag-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id q2so13757003wrp.4 for ; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:11:10 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Uf7YcQ6j4//fvt+DAqWWp4t8Vqx45+iboex03SWw704=; b=XUbEnVGF1Y1UHvEYFzJaAdFz7AZkRD6nv+sb/o8nXa71kuT8E30ouTY9YXNC00jdXi wvr9F7ILjQlc4h860nAwtEFu/xYvtvyJBt5SrGGh+lx+sFK333b4dLfa8nHGkn3keyKL za4E4qlRr5JNDbHpgdmxNXcXyBsiQZAjTisVmh9bh4yU1D0nwU3t2wJwKb9iGn5BTiH9 Amg/RkKXkxxRmTokV2zxCrmM0ONupNyX/9rqSE0C5S/y57oFBE55s32wNxtlFy6iZ9ro U96D0VuGML35ZktNxbqJgaKUMfKhteDPliBjzDJQu6yexlB3qmc4sZyt7dzGa+w6hSp9 7mNA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JCDvM31VzPjq253LH5VbFcEjWSyesY3LS0Hp9IH63WjFCyotI /q2pxrAJwZ9JSM41X6cfbVqdGMfl/37I13FV9+mpBZLtb3rtA68QQBUsyrVsz8aaMKZj2d4jlz7 8bVKc6z8QX4g= X-Received: by 2002:adf:dcc5:: with SMTP id x5mr80661632wrm.167.1609791069110; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:11:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzkdFEzyOlA3Y8Eyk0/ltCkVecx3CgLuE1hJOwodBehjEmZXochwhSLXoNLGXuGRBsrbBGEYg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:dcc5:: with SMTP id x5mr80661617wrm.167.1609791068978; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:11:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.3.108] (p5b0c69d7.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [91.12.105.215]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 138sm731389wma.41.2021.01.04.12.11.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 Jan 2021 12:11:08 -0800 (PST) From: David Hildenbrand Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 4/4] mm: pre zero out free pages to speed up page allocation for __GFP_ZERO Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2021 21:11:07 +0100 Message-Id: <43576DAD-8A3B-4691-8808-90C5FDCF03B7@redhat.com> References: Cc: Matthew Wilcox , Alexander Duyck , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , Dan Williams , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , David Hildenbrand , Jason Wang , Michal Hocko , Liang Li , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org In-Reply-To: To: Dave Hansen X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18C66) Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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: > Am 04.01.2021 um 20:52 schrieb Dave Hansen : >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn 1/4/21 11:27 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Mon, Jan 04, 2021 at 11:19:13AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: >>> On 12/21/20 8:30 AM, Liang Li wrote: >>>> --- a/include/linux/page-flags.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/page-flags.h >>>> @@ -137,6 +137,9 @@ enum pageflags { >>>> #endif >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_64BIT >>>> PG_arch_2, >>>> +#endif >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PREZERO_PAGE >>>> + PG_zero, >>>> #endif >>>> __NR_PAGEFLAGS, >>>=20 >>> I don't think this is worth a generic page->flags bit. >>>=20 >>> There's a ton of space in 'struct page' for pages that are in the >>> allocator. Can't we use some of that space? >>=20 >> I was going to object to that too, but I think the entire approach is >> flawed and needs to be thrown out. It just nukes the caches in extremel= y >> subtle and hard to measure ways, lowering overall system performance. >=20 > Yeah, it certainly can't be the default, but it *is* useful for thing > where we know that there are no cache benefits to zeroing close to where > the memory is allocated. >=20 > The trick is opting into it somehow, either in a process or a VMA. >=20 The patch set is mostly trying to optimize starting a new process. So proce= ss/vma doesn=E2=80=98t really work. I still wonder if using tmpfs/shmem cannot somehow be used to cover the ori= ginal use case of starting a new vm fast (or rebooting an existing one invo= lving restarting the process).