lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 0/5] Allocate memmap from hotadded memory
From
Date
On 25.07.19 18:02, Oscar Salvador wrote:
> Here we go with v3.
>
> v3 -> v2:
> * Rewrite about vmemmap pages handling.
> Prior to this version, I was (ab)using hugepages fields
> from struct page, while here I am officially adding a new
> sub-page type with the fields I need.
>
> * Drop MHP_MEMMAP_{MEMBLOCK,DEVICE} in favor of MHP_MEMMAP_ON_MEMORY.
> While I am still not 100% if this the right decision, and while I
> still see some gaining in having MHP_MEMMAP_{MEMBLOCK,DEVICE},
> having only one flag ease the code.
> If the user wants to allocate memmaps per memblock, it'll
> have to call add_memory() variants with memory-block granularity.
>
> If we happen to have a more clear usecase MHP_MEMMAP_MEMBLOCK
> flag in the future, so user does not have to bother about the way
> it calls add_memory() variants, but only pass a flag, we can add it.
> Actually, I already had the code, so add it in the future is going to be
> easy.

FWIW, for now I think this is the right thing to do. Whoever roots for
this now has to propose an interface on how this is going to be used
now. Otherwise, this is untested, dead code. Nobody wants that :)

>
> * Granularity check when hot-removing memory.
> Just checking that the granularity is the same.

This is for the powernv/memtrace.c case, right?

>
> [Testing]
>
> - x86_64: small and large memblocks (128MB, 1G and 2G)
>
> So far, only acpi memory hotplug uses the new flag.
> The other callers can be changed depending on their needs.
>
> [Coverletter]
>
> This is another step to make memory hotplug more usable. The primary
> goal of this patchset is to reduce memory overhead of the hot-added
> memory (at least for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP memory model). The current way we use
> to populate memmap (struct page array) has two main drawbacks:
>
> a) it consumes an additional memory until the hotadded memory itself is
> onlined and
> b) memmap might end up on a different numa node which is especially true
> for movable_node configuration.
>
> a) it is a problem especially for memory hotplug based memory "ballooning"
> solutions when the delay between physical memory hotplug and the
> onlining can lead to OOM and that led to introduction of hacks like auto
> onlining (see 31bc3858ea3e ("memory-hotplug: add automatic onlining
> policy for the newly added memory")).
>
> b) can have performance drawbacks.

We now also consume less NORMAL memory when onlining DIMMs to the
MOVABLE_ZONE, as the vmemmap no longer ends up in the NORMAL zone -
which is nice. (not perfect, but nice :) )

I'm curious on how/when you are initializing the vmemmap and setting all
vmemmap pages to the new page type. Right now, we initialize it when
onlining memory - will have a look how you sorted that out :)

>
> One way to mitigate all these issues is to simply allocate memmap array
> (which is the largest memory footprint of the physical memory hotplug)
> from the hot-added memory itself. SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP memory model allows
> us to map any pfn range so the memory doesn't need to be online to be
> usable for the array. See patch 3 for more details.
> This feature is only usable when CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is set.
>
> [Overall design]:
>
> Implementation wise we reuse vmem_altmap infrastructure to override
> the default allocator used by vmemap_populate. Once the memmap is
> allocated we need a way to mark altmap pfns used for the allocation.
> If MHP_MEMMAP_ON_MEMORY flag was passed, we set up the layout of the
> altmap structure at the beginning of __add_pages(), and then we call
> mark_vmemmap_pages().
>
> MHP_MEMMAP_ON_MEMORY flag parameter will specify to allocate memmaps
> from the hot-added range.
> If callers wants memmaps to be allocated per memory block, it will
> have to call add_memory() variants in memory-block granularity
> spanning the whole range, while if it wants to allocate memmaps
> per whole memory range, just one call will do.

I assume you you played with all kinds of offlining/onlining of affected
memory blocks and especially that the vmemmap pages remain set to the
new page type?

--

Thanks,

David / dhildenb

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-25 18:57    [W:0.144 / U:2.448 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site