From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
To: "zhaoyang.huang" <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com>,
ke.wang@unisoc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: remove redundant clear page when CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON configured
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 14:24:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZP8G5nIwc6b0LrHC@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZP8EKWev8H9kMka3@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On Mon 11-09-23 14:12:26, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 11-09-23 18:49:06, zhaoyang.huang wrote:
> > From: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.com>
> >
> > There will be redundant clear page within vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio
> > when CONFIG_INIT_ON_ALLOC_DEFAULT_ON is on. Remove it by judging related
> > configs.
>
> Thanks for spotting this. I suspect this is a fix based on a code review
> rather than a real performance issue, right? It is always good to
> mention that. From a very quick look it seems that many architectures
> just definte vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio to use __GFP_ZERO so they
> are not affected by this. This means that only a subset of architectures
> are really affected. This is an important information as well.
> Finally I think it would be more appropriate to mention that the double
> initialization is done when init_on_alloc is enabled rather than
> referring to the above config option which only controls whether the
> functionality is enabled by default.
>
> I would rephrase as follows:
> Many architectures (alpha, arm64, ia64, m68k s390, x86) define their own
> vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio implementations which use __GFP_ZERO for
> the page allocation.
>
> Those which rely on the default implementation, however, would currently
> go through the initialization twice (oce in the page allocator and
> second in vma_alloc_zeroed_movable_folio) if init_on_alloc is enabled
> though. Fix this by checking want_init_on_alloc before calling
> clear_user_highpage.
Btw. have you checked other places which could have a similar problem?
From a very quick look __do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page, hugetlb_no_page,
hugetlbfs_fallocate and shmem_mfill_atomic_pte all follow the same
pattern. They do allocate memory so they go through the initialization
in the allocator and then reinitialized.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-11 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-11 10:49 zhaoyang.huang
2023-09-11 12:12 ` Michal Hocko
2023-09-11 12:24 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2023-09-11 12:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2023-09-11 13:03 ` Michal Hocko
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=ZP8G5nIwc6b0LrHC@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=huangzhaoyang@gmail.com \
--cc=ke.wang@unisoc.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=zhaoyang.huang@unisoc.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