Re: [RFC PATCH part2 0/4] Allow allocating pagetable on local node in movablemem_map.

[Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>]

Hi Yinghai,

Would you please help to review this patch-set ?

And how do you think of the memblock flag idea ?

FYI, Liu Jiang has proposed a similar idea before.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/6/422

But we may have the following difference:
1) It is a flag, not a tag, which means a range may have several
    different attributes.
2) Mark node-lify-cycle data, and put it on local node, and free
    it when hot-removing.
3) Mark and reserve movable memory, as you did.

Thanks. :)

On 03/21/2013 05:21 PM, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Yinghai, all,
>
> This patch-set is based on Yinghai's tree:
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/yinghai/linux-yinghai.git for-x86-mm
>
> For main line, we need to apply Yinghai's
> "x86, ACPI, numa: Parse numa info early" patch-set first.
> Please refer to:
> v1: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/7/642
> v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/10/47
>
>
> In this part2 patch-set, we didi the following things:
> 1) Introduce a "bool hotpluggable" member into struct numa_memblk so that we are
>     able to know which memory ranges in numa_meminfo are hotpluggable.
>     All the related apis have been changed.
> 2) Introduce a new global variable "numa_meminfo_all" to store all the memory ranges
>     recorded in SRAT, because numa_cleanup_meminfo() will remove ranges higher than
>     max_pfn.
>     We need full numa memory info to limit zone_movable_pfn[].
> 3) Move movablemem_map sanitization after memory mapping is initialized so that
>     pagetable allocation will not be limited by movablemem_map.
>
>
> On the other hand, we may have another way to solve this problem:
>
> Not only pagetable and vmemmap pages, but also all the data whose life cycle is the
> same as a node, could be put on local node.
>
> 1) Introduce a flag into memblock, such as "LOCAL_NODE_DATA", to mark out which
>     ranges have the same life cycle with node.
> 2) Only keep existing memory ranges in movablemem_map (no need to introduce
>     numa_meminfo_all), and exclude these LOCAL_NODE_DATA ranges.
> 3) When hot-removing, we are able to find out these ranges, and free them first.
>     This is very important.
>
> Also, hot-add logic needs to be modified, too. As Yinghai mentioned before, I think
> we can make memblock alive when memory is hot-added. And go with the same logic
> as it is when booting.
>
> How do you think?
>
>
> Tang Chen (4):
>    x86, mm, numa, acpi: Introduce numa_meminfo_all to store all the numa
>      meminfo.
>    x86, mm, numa, acpi: Introduce hotplug info into struct numa_meminfo.
>    x86, mm, numa, acpi: Consider hotplug info when cleanup numa_meminfo.
>    x86, mm, numa, acpi: Sanitize movablemem_map after memory mapping
>      initialized.
>
>   arch/x86/include/asm/numa.h     |    3 +-
>   arch/x86/kernel/apic/numaq_32.c |    2 +-
>   arch/x86/mm/amdtopology.c       |    3 +-
>   arch/x86/mm/numa.c              |  161 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>   arch/x86/mm/numa_internal.h     |    1 +
>   arch/x86/mm/srat.c              |  141 +++++-----------------------------
>   6 files changed, 178 insertions(+), 133 deletions(-)
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

--
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>