Re: [PATCH v10 2/4] mm: memory_hotplug: override memmap_on_memory when hugetlb_free_vmemmap=on

From: Muchun Song
Date: Thu May 12 2022 - 10:00:04 EST


On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 03:04:57PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 12.05.22 14:50, Muchun Song wrote:
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 09:36:15AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> >> On 09.05.22 08:27, Muchun Song wrote:
> >>> Optimizing HugeTLB vmemmap pages is not compatible with allocating memmap on
> >>> hot added memory. If "hugetlb_free_vmemmap=on" and
> >>> memory_hotplug.memmap_on_memory" are both passed on the kernel command line,
> >>> optimizing hugetlb pages takes precedence.
> >>
> >> Why?
> >>
> >
> > Because both two features are not compatible since hugetlb_free_vmemmap cannot
> > optimize the vmemmap pages allocated from alternative allocator (when
> > memory_hotplug.memmap_on_memory=1). So when the feature of hugetlb_free_vmemmap
> > is introduced, I made hugetlb_free_vmemmap take precedence. BTW, I have a plan
> > to remove this restriction, I'll post it out ASAP.
>
> I was asking why vmemmap optimization should take precedence.
> memmap_on_memory makes it more likely to succeed memory hotplug in
> close-to-OOM situations -- which is IMHO more important than a vmemmap
> optimization.
>

I thought the users who enable hugetlb_free_vmemmap value memory
savings more, so I made a decision in commit 4bab4964a59f. Seems
I made a bad decision from your description.

> But anyhow, the proper approach should most probably be to simply not
> mess with the vmemmap if we stumble over a vmemmap that's special due to
> memmap_on_memory. I assume that's what you're talking about sending out.
>

I mean I want to have hugetlb_vmemmap.c do the check whether the section
which the HugeTLB pages belong to can be optimized instead of making
hugetlb_free_vmemmap take precedence. E.g. If the section's vmemmap pages
are allocated from the added memory block itself, hugetlb_free_vmemmap will
refuse to optimize the vmemmap, otherwise, do the optimization. Then
both kernel parameters are compatible. I have done those patches, but
haven't send them out.

Thanks.