Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: Defer ZONE_DEVICE page initialization to the point where we init pgmap

[Dan Williams]

On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Pasha Tatashin
<Pavel.Tatashin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> On 9/12/18 12:50 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 8:48 AM, Alexander Duyck
>> <alexander.duyck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 6:59 AM Pasha Tatashin
>>> <Pavel.Tatashin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>>
>>>> Please re-base on linux-next,  memmap_init_zone() has been updated there
>>>> compared to mainline. You might even find a way to unify some parts of
>>>> memmap_init_zone and memmap_init_zone_device as memmap_init_zone() is a
>>>> lot simpler now.
>>>
>>> This patch applied to the linux-next tree with only a little bit of
>>> fuzz. It looks like it is mostly due to some code you had added above
>>> the function as well. I have updated this patch so that it will apply
>>> to both linux and linux-next by just moving the new function to
>>> underneath memmap_init_zone instead of above it.
>>>
>>>> I think __init_single_page() should stay local to page_alloc.c to keep
>>>> the inlining optimization.
>>>
>>> I agree. In addition it will make pulling common init together into
>>> one space easier. I would rather not have us create an opportunity for
>>> things to further diverge by making it available for anybody to use.
>>
>> I'll buy the inline argument for keeping the new routine in
>> page_alloc.c, but I otherwise do not see the divergence danger or
>> "making __init_single_page() available for anybody" given the the
>> declaration is limited in scope to a mm/ local header file.
>>
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> It is much harder for compiler to decide that function can be inlined
> once it is non-static. Of course, we can simply move this function to a
> header file, and declare it inline to begin with.
>
> But, still __init_single_page() is so performance sensitive, that I'd
> like to reduce number of callers to this function, and keep it in .c file.

Yes, agree, inline considerations win the day. I was just objecting to
the "make it available for anybody" assertion.