Re: [PATCH 3/3] memory hotplug: use unified logic for is_removableand offline_pages

[Hiroyuki Kamezawa]

2010/9/6 Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>:
> On Mon 06-09-10 14:47:16, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>>
>> Now, sysfs interface of memory hotplug shows whether the section is
>> removable or not. But it checks only migrateype of pages and doesn't
>> check details of cluster of pages.
>>
>> Next, memory hotplug's set_migratetype_isolate() has the same kind
>> of check, too. But the migrate-type is just a "hint" and the pageblock
>> can contain several types of pages if fragmentation is very heavy.
>>
>> To get precise information, we need to check
>>  - the pageblock only contains free pages or LRU pages.
>>
>> This patch adds the function __count_unmovable_pages() and makes
>> above 2 checks to use the same logic. This will improve user experience
>> of memory hotplug because sysfs interface tells accurate information.
>>
>> Note:
>> it may be better to check MIGRATE_UNMOVABLE for making failure case quick.
>>
>> Changelog: 2010/09/06
>>  - added comments.
>>  - removed zone->lock.
>>  - changed the name of the function to be is_pageblock_removable_async().
>>    because I removed the zone->lock.
>
> wouldn't be __is_pageblock_removable a better name? _async suffix is
> usually used for asynchronous operations and this is just a function
> withtout locks.
>
rename as _is_pagebloc_removable_nolock().


>>
>> Reported-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |    1
>>  mm/memory_hotplug.c            |   15 -------
>>  mm/page_alloc.c                |   77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>  3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>
>> Index: kametest/mm/page_alloc.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- kametest.orig/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ kametest/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -5274,11 +5274,61 @@ void set_pageblock_flags_group(struct pa
>>   * page allocater never alloc memory from ISOLATE block.
>>   */
>>
>
> Can we add a comment on the locking? Something like:
> Caller should hold zone->lock if he needs consistent results.
>
Hmm. ok.

>> +static int __count_immobile_pages(struct zone *zone, struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +     unsigned long pfn, iter, found;
>> +     /*
>> +      * For avoiding noise data, lru_add_drain_all() should be called
>> +      * If ZONE_MOVABLE, the zone never contains immobile pages
>> +      */
>> +     if (zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE)
>> +             return 0;
>> +
>> +     pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
>> +     for (found = 0, iter = 0; iter < pageblock_nr_pages; iter++) {
>> +             unsigned long check = pfn + iter;
>> +
>> +             if (!pfn_valid_within(check)) {
>> +                     iter++;
>> +                     continue;
>> +             }
>> +             page = pfn_to_page(check);
>> +             if (!page_count(page)) {
>> +                     if (PageBuddy(page))
>> +                             iter += (1 << page_order(page)) - 1;
>> +                     continue;
>> +             }
>> +             if (!PageLRU(page))
>> +                     found++;
>> +             /*
>> +              * If the page is not RAM, page_count()should be 0.
>> +              * we don't need more check. This is an _used_ not-movable page.
>> +              *
>> +              * The problematic thing here is PG_reserved pages. PG_reserved
>> +              * is set to both of a memory hole page and a _used_ kernel
>> +              * page at boot.
>> +              */
>> +     }
>> +     return found;
>> +}
>> +
>> +bool is_pageblock_removable_async(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +     struct zone *zone = page_zone(page);
>> +     unsigned long flags;
>> +     int num;
>> +     /* Don't take zone->lock interntionally. */
>
> Could you add the reason?
> Don't take zone-> lock intentionally because we are called from the
> userspace (sysfs interface).
>
I don't like to assume caller context which will limit the callers.

/* holding zone->lock or not is caller's job. */


> [...]
>>       /* All pageblocks in the memory block are likely to be hot-removable */
>> Index: kametest/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
>> ===================================================================
>> --- kametest.orig/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
>> +++ kametest/include/linux/memory_hotplug.h
>> @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ extern void online_page(struct page *pag
>>  /* VM interface that may be used by firmware interface */
>>  extern int online_pages(unsigned long, unsigned long);
>>  extern void __offline_isolated_pages(unsigned long, unsigned long);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_HOTREMOVE
>
>> +extern bool is_pageblock_removable_async(struct page *page);
>
> #else
> #define is_pageblock_removable_async(p) 0
> #endif
> ?

Is this function is called even if HOTREMOVE is off ?
If so, the caller is buggy. I'll check tomorrow.

Thanks,
-Kame
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/