From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Move __vma_address() to internal.h to be inlined in huge_memory.c
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 14:45:13 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1406121444140.12437@chino.kir.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <539A1CDA.5000709@hp.com>
On Thu, 12 Jun 2014, Waiman Long wrote:
> > > The vma_address() function which is used to compute the virtual address
> > > within a VMA is used only by 2 files in the mm subsystem - rmap.c and
> > > huge_memory.c. This function is defined in rmap.c and is inlined by
> > > its callers there, but it is also declared as an external function.
> > >
> > > However, the __split_huge_page() function which calls vma_address()
> > > in huge_memory.c is calling it as a real function call. This is not
> > > as efficient as an inlined function. This patch moves the underlying
> > > inlined __vma_address() function to internal.h to be shared by both
> > > the rmap.c and huge_memory.c file.
> > This increases huge_memory.o's text+data_bss by 311 bytes, which makes
> > me suspect that it is a bad change due to its increase of kernel cache
> > footprint.
> >
> > Perhaps we should be noinlining __vma_address()?
>
> On my test machine, I saw an increase of 144 bytes in the text segment
> of huge_memory.o. The size in size is caused by an increase in the size
> of the __split_huge_page function. When I remove the
>
> if (unlikely(is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma)))
> pgoff = page->index << huge_page_order(page_hstate(page));
>
> check, the increase in size drops down to 24 bytes. As a THP cannot be
> a hugetlb page, there is no point in doing this check for a THP. I will
> update the patch to pass in an additional argument to disable this
> check for __split_huge_page.
>
I think we're seeking a reason or performance numbers that suggest
__vma_address() being inline is appropriate and so far we lack any such
evidence. Adding additional parameters to determine checks isn't going to
change the fact that it increases text size needlessly.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-12 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-12 19:15 Waiman Long
2014-06-12 19:25 ` Andrew Morton
2014-06-12 21:34 ` Waiman Long
2014-06-12 21:45 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2014-06-16 19:34 ` Waiman Long
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=alpine.DEB.2.02.1406121444140.12437@chino.kir.corp.google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=waiman.long@hp.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