Message ID | 20201005121534.15649-3-david@redhat.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable, archived |
Headers | show |
Series | mm: place pages to the freelist tail when onlining and undoing isolation | expand |
On 10/5/20 2:15 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > __putback_isolated_page() already documents that pages will be placed to > the tail of the freelist - this is, however, not the case for > "order >= MAX_ORDER - 2" (see buddy_merge_likely()) - which should be > the case for all existing users. > > This change affects two users: > - free page reporting > - page isolation, when undoing the isolation (including memory onlining). > > This behavior is desireable for pages that haven't really been touched > lately, so exactly the two users that don't actually read/write page > content, but rather move untouched pages. > > The new behavior is especially desirable for memory onlining, where we > allow allocation of newly onlined pages via undo_isolate_page_range() > in online_pages(). Right now, we always place them to the head of the > freelist, resulting in undesireable behavior: Assume we add > individual memory chunks via add_memory() and online them right away to > the NORMAL zone. We create a dependency chain of unmovable allocations > e.g., via the memmap. The memmap of the next chunk will be placed onto > previous chunks - if the last block cannot get offlined+removed, all > dependent ones cannot get offlined+removed. While this can already be > observed with individual DIMMs, it's more of an issue for virtio-mem > (and I suspect also ppc DLPAR). > > Document that this should only be used for optimizations, and no code > should rely on this behavior for correction (if the order of the > freelists ever changes). > > We won't care about page shuffling: memory onlining already properly > shuffles after onlining. free page reporting doesn't care about > physically contiguous ranges, and there are already cases where page > isolation will simply move (physically close) free pages to (currently) > the head of the freelists via move_freepages_block() instead of > shuffling. If this becomes ever relevant, we should shuffle the whole > zone when undoing isolation of larger ranges, and after > free_contig_range(). > > Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> > Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com> > Reviewed-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com> > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index 2bf235b1953f..df5ff0cd6df1 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c @@ -94,6 +94,18 @@ typedef int __bitwise fpi_t; */ #define FPI_SKIP_REPORT_NOTIFY ((__force fpi_t)BIT(0)) +/* + * Place the (possibly merged) page to the tail of the freelist. Will ignore + * page shuffling (relevant code - e.g., memory onlining - is expected to + * shuffle the whole zone). + * + * Note: No code should rely on this flag for correctness - it's purely + * to allow for optimizations when handing back either fresh pages + * (memory onlining) or untouched pages (page isolation, free page + * reporting). + */ +#define FPI_TO_TAIL ((__force fpi_t)BIT(1)) + /* prevent >1 _updater_ of zone percpu pageset ->high and ->batch fields */ static DEFINE_MUTEX(pcp_batch_high_lock); #define MIN_PERCPU_PAGELIST_FRACTION (8) @@ -1044,7 +1056,9 @@ static inline void __free_one_page(struct page *page, done_merging: set_page_order(page, order); - if (is_shuffle_order(order)) + if (fpi_flags & FPI_TO_TAIL) + to_tail = true; + else if (is_shuffle_order(order)) to_tail = shuffle_pick_tail(); else to_tail = buddy_merge_likely(pfn, buddy_pfn, page, order); @@ -3306,7 +3320,7 @@ void __putback_isolated_page(struct page *page, unsigned int order, int mt) /* Return isolated page to tail of freelist. */ __free_one_page(page, page_to_pfn(page), zone, order, mt, - FPI_SKIP_REPORT_NOTIFY); + FPI_SKIP_REPORT_NOTIFY | FPI_TO_TAIL); } /*