linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Dan Zhao <dan.zhao@hisilicon.com>,
	mhocko@suse.com, Yiping Xu <xuyiping@hisilicon.com>,
	puck.chen@foxmail.com, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	suzhuangluan@hisilicon.com, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linuxarm@huawei.com, albert.lubing@hisilicon.com,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	oliver.fu@hisilicon.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com,
	saberlily.xia@hisilicon.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mem-model: add flatmem model for arm64
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 11:18:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5716F51E.70101@hisilicon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160412145903.GF8066@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>

Hi Catalin,

Thanks for your reply.
On 2016/4/12 22:59, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:31:53PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 11 April 2016 at 11:59, Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>> On 2016/4/11 16:00, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>> On 11 April 2016 at 09:55, Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2016/4/11 15:35, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>>>>> On 11 April 2016 at 04:49, Chen Feng <puck.chen@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>  0             1.5G    2G             3.5G            4G
>>>>>>>  |              |      |               |              |
>>>>>>>  +--------------+------+---------------+--------------+
>>>>>>>  |    MEM       | hole |     MEM       |   IO (regs)  |
>>>>>>>  +--------------+------+---------------+--------------+
>>>>> The hole in 1.5G ~ 2G is also allocated mem-map array. And also with the 3.5G ~ 4G.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> No, it is not. It may be covered by a section, but that does not mean
>>>> sparsemem vmemmap will actually allocate backing for it. The
>>>> granularity used by sparsemem vmemmap on a 4k pages kernel is 128 MB,
>>>> due to the fact that the backing is performed at PMD granularity.
>>>>
>>>> Please, could you share the contents of the vmemmap section in
>>>> /sys/kernel/debug/kernel_page_tables of your system running with
>>>> sparsemem vmemmap enabled? You will need to set CONFIG_ARM64_PTDUMP=y
>>>
>>> Please see the pg-tables below.
>>>
>>> With sparse and vmemmap enable.
>>>
>>> ---[ vmemmap start ]---
>>> 0xffffffbdc0200000-0xffffffbdc4800000          70M     RW NX SHD AF    UXN MEM/NORMAL
>>> ---[ vmemmap end ]---
> [...]
>>> The board is 4GB, and the memap is 70MB
>>> 1G memory --- 14MB mem_map array.
>>
>> No, this is incorrect. 1 GB corresponds with 16 MB worth of struct
>> pages assuming sizeof(struct page) == 64
>>
>> So you are losing 6 MB to rounding here, which I agree is significant.
>> I wonder if it makes sense to use a lower value for SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>> on 4k pages kernels, but perhaps we're better off asking the opinion
>> of the other cc'ees.
> 
> IIRC, SECTION_SIZE_BITS was chosen to be the maximum sane value we were
> thinking of at the time, assuming that 1GB RAM alignment to be fairly
> normal. For the !SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP case, we should probably be fine with
> 29 but, as Will said, we need to be careful with the page flags. At a
> quick look, we have 25 page flags, 2 bits per zone, NUMA nodes and (48 -
> section_size_bits) for the section width. We also need to take into
> account 4 more bits for 52-bit PA support (ARMv8.2). So, without NUMA
> nodes, we are currently at 49 bits used in page->flags.
> 
> For the SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP case, we can decrease the SECTION_SIZE_BITS in
> the MAX_ORDER limit.
> 
> An alternative would be to free the vmemmap holes later (but still keep
> the vmemmap mapping alias). Yet another option would be to change the
> sparse_mem_map_populate() logic get the actual section end rather than
> always assuming PAGES_PER_SECTION. But I don't think any of these are
> worth if we can safely reduce SECTION_SIZE_BITS.
> 
Yes,
currently,it's safely to reduce the SECTION_SIZE_BITS to match this issue
very well.

As I mentioned before, if the memory layout is not like this scene. There
will be not suitable to reduce the SECTION_SIZE_BITS.

We have 4G memory, and 64GB phys address.

There will be a lot of holes in the memory layout.
And the *holes size are not always the same*.

So,it's the reason I want to enable flat-mem in ARM64-ARCH. Why not makes
the flat-mem an optional setting for arm64i 1/4 ?






--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-20  3:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-05  8:22 Chen Feng
2016-04-05  8:22 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64: mm: make pfn always valid with flat memory Chen Feng
2016-04-07  7:39   ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11 11:08   ` Xishi Qiu
2016-04-12 15:00     ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-07  7:38 ` [PATCH 1/2] arm64: mem-model: add flatmem model for arm64 Chen Feng
2016-04-07 14:21 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-11  2:49   ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11  7:35     ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-11  7:55       ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11  8:00         ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-11  9:59           ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11 10:31             ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-11 10:40               ` Will Deacon
2016-04-11 10:57                 ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11 18:11                   ` Laura Abbott
2016-04-12 14:44                 ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-12 14:59               ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-20  3:18                 ` Chen Feng [this message]
2016-04-20  9:32                   ` Catalin Marinas
2016-04-11 10:48             ` Chen Feng
2016-04-11 11:02               ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-04-12 14:03     ` Jungseok Lee

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=5716F51E.70101@hisilicon.com \
    --to=puck.chen@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=albert.lubing@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dan.zhao@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=oliver.fu@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=puck.chen@foxmail.com \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=saberlily.xia@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=suzhuangluan@hisilicon.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=xuyiping@hisilicon.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