Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: support CONFIG_ZONE_DEVICE + CONFIG_ZONE_DMA

[Joonsoo Kim]

Hello,

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 03:11:36PM -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Morton
> <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:33:48 -0800 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> >> Towards this end, alias ZONE_DMA and ZONE_DEVICE to work around needing
> >> >> to maintain a unique zone number for ZONE_DEVICE.  Record the geometry
> >> >> of ZONE_DMA at init (->init_spanned_pages) and use that information in
> >> >> is_zone_device_page() to differentiate pages allocated via
> >> >> devm_memremap_pages() vs true ZONE_DMA pages.  Otherwise, use the
> >> >> simpler definition of is_zone_device_page() when ZONE_DMA is turned off.
> >> >>
> >> >> Note that this also teaches the memory hot remove path that the zone may
> >> >> not have sections for all pfn spans (->zone_dyn_start_pfn).
> >> >>
> >> >> A user visible implication of this change is potentially an unexpectedly
> >> >> high "spanned" value in /proc/zoneinfo for the DMA zone.
> >> >
> >> > Well, all these icky tricks are to avoid increasing ZONES_SHIFT, yes?
> >> > Is it possible to just use ZONES_SHIFT=3?
> >>
> >> Last I tried I hit this warning in mm/memory.c
> >>
> >> #warning Unfortunate NUMA and NUMA Balancing config, growing
> >> page-frame for last_cpupid.
> >
> > Well yes, it may take a bit of work - perhaps salvaging a bit from
> > somewhere else if poss.  But that might provide a better overall
> > solution so could you please have a think?
> >
> 
> Will do, especially since other efforts are feeling the pinch on the
> MAX_NR_ZONES limitation.

Please refer my previous attempt to add a new zone, ZONE_CMA.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/12/84

It salvages a bit from SECTION_WIDTH by increasing section size.
Similarly, I guess we can reduce NODE_WIDTH if needed although
it could cause to reduce maximum node size.

Thanks.