Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] mm: Enable Buddy allocation isolation for CDM nodes

From: Anshuman Khandual
Date: Tue Feb 14 2017 - 05:18:44 EST


On 02/14/2017 01:58 PM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 02/10/2017 11:06 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> This implements allocation isolation for CDM nodes in buddy allocator by
>> discarding CDM memory zones all the time except in the cases where the gfp
>> flag has got __GFP_THISNODE or the nodemask contains CDM nodes in cases
>> where it is non NULL (explicit allocation request in the kernel or user
>> process MPOL_BIND policy based requests).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index 84d61bb..392c24a 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@
>> #include <linux/page_owner.h>
>> #include <linux/kthread.h>
>> #include <linux/memcontrol.h>
>> +#include <linux/node.h>
>>
>> #include <asm/sections.h>
>> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>> @@ -2908,6 +2909,21 @@ get_page_from_freelist(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order, int alloc_flags,
>> struct page *page;
>> unsigned long mark;
>>
>> + /*
>> + * CDM nodes get skipped if the requested gfp flag
>> + * does not have __GFP_THISNODE set or the nodemask
>> + * does not have any CDM nodes in case the nodemask
>> + * is non NULL (explicit allocation requests from
>> + * kernel or user process MPOL_BIND policy which has
>> + * CDM nodes).
>> + */
>> + if (is_cdm_node(zone->zone_pgdat->node_id)) {
>> + if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)) {
>> + if (!ac->nodemask)
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> + }
>
> With the current cpuset implementation, this will have a subtle corner
> case when allocating from a cpuset that allows the cdm node, and there
> is no (task or vma) mempolicy applied for the allocation. In the fast
> path (__alloc_pages_nodemask()) we'll set ac->nodemask to
> current->mems_allowed, so your code will wrongly assume that this
> ac->nodemask is a policy that allows the CDM node. Probably not what you
> want?

You are right, its a problem and not what we want. We can make the
function get_page_from_freelist() take another parameter "orig_nodemask"
which gets passed into __alloc_pages_nodemask() in the first place. So
inside zonelist iterator we can compare orig_nodemask with current
ac.nodemask to figure out if cpuset swapping of nodemask happened and
skip CDM node if necessary. Thats a viable solution IMHO.

>
> This might change if we decide to fix the cpuset vs mempolicy issues [1]
> so your input on that topic with your recent experience with all the
> alternative CDM isolation implementations would be useful. Thanks.
>
> [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg121760.html

Sure, will look into the details.