Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1693556 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-21 12:10 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-07-21 16:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com> - 2017-07-21 12:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> - 2017-07-21 13:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-07-21 16:50 +0200
| From | Zhaoyang Huang <huangzhaoyang@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-21 12:10 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size |
| Message-ID | <u5D2F-3tB-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
we just record the cached_hole_size now, which will be used when
the criteria meet both of 'free_vmap_cache == NULL' and 'size <
cached_hole_size'. However, under above scenario, the search will
start from the rb_root and then find the node which just in front
of the cached hole.
free_vmap_cache miss:
vmap_area_root
/ \
_next U
/ (T1)
cached_hole_node
/
... (T2)
/
first
vmap_area_list->first->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next
|-------(T3)-------| | <<< cached_hole_size >>> |
vmap_area_list->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next
| <<< cached_hole_size >>> |
The time cost to search the node now is T = T1 + T2 + T3.
The commit add a cached_hole_node here to record the one just in front of
the cached_hole_size, which can help to avoid walking the rb tree and
the list and make the T = 0;
Signed-off-by: Zhaoyang Huang <zhaoyang.huang@spreadtrum.com>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index 8698c1c..4e76e7f 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -336,6 +336,7 @@ unsigned long vmalloc_to_pfn(const void *vmalloc_addr)
/* The vmap cache globals are protected by vmap_area_lock */
static struct rb_node *free_vmap_cache;
+static struct vmap_area *cached_hole_node;
static unsigned long cached_hole_size;
static unsigned long cached_vstart;
static unsigned long cached_align;
@@ -444,6 +445,12 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size,
size < cached_hole_size ||
vstart < cached_vstart ||
align < cached_align) {
+ /*if we have a cached node, just use it*/
+ if ((size < cached_hole_size) && cached_hole_node != NULL) {
+ addr = ALIGN(cached_hole_node->va_end, align);
+ cached_hole_node = NULL;
+ goto found;
+ }
nocache:
cached_hole_size = 0;
free_vmap_cache = NULL;
@@ -487,8 +494,13 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size,
/* from the starting point, walk areas until a suitable hole is found */
while (addr + size > first->va_start && addr + size <= vend) {
- if (addr + cached_hole_size < first->va_start)
+ if (addr + cached_hole_size < first->va_start) {
cached_hole_size = first->va_start - addr;
+ /*record the node corresponding to the hole*/
+ cached_hole_node = (first->list.prev ==
+ &vmap_area_list) ?
+ NULL : list_prev_entry(first, list);
+ }
addr = ALIGN(first->va_end, align);
if (addr + size < addr)
goto overflow;
@@ -571,10 +583,17 @@ static void __free_vmap_area(struct vmap_area *va)
}
}
}
+ if (va == cached_hole_node) {
+ /*cached node is freed, the hole get bigger*/
+ if (cached_hole_node->list.prev != &vmap_area_list)
+ cached_hole_node = list_prev_entry(cached_hole_node,
+ list);
+ else
+ cached_hole_node = NULL;
+ }
rb_erase(&va->rb_node, &vmap_area_root);
RB_CLEAR_NODE(&va->rb_node);
list_del_rcu(&va->list);
-
/*
* Track the highest possible candidate for pcpu area
* allocation. Areas outside of vmalloc area can be returned
--
1.9.1
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-21 13:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size |
| Message-ID | <u5EBr-4jK-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1693556 |
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 06:01:41PM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote: > we just record the cached_hole_size now, which will be used when > the criteria meet both of 'free_vmap_cache == NULL' and 'size < > cached_hole_size'. However, under above scenario, the search will > start from the rb_root and then find the node which just in front > of the cached hole. > > free_vmap_cache miss: > vmap_area_root > / \ > _next U > / (T1) > cached_hole_node > / > ... (T2) > / > first > > vmap_area_list->first->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next > |-------(T3)-------| | <<< cached_hole_size >>> | > > vmap_area_list->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next > | <<< cached_hole_size >>> | > > The time cost to search the node now is T = T1 + T2 + T3. > The commit add a cached_hole_node here to record the one just in front of > the cached_hole_size, which can help to avoid walking the rb tree and > the list and make the T = 0; Yes, but does this matter in practice? Are there any workloads where this makes a difference? If so, how much?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-21 16:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] mm/vmalloc: add a node corresponding to cached_hole_size |
| Message-ID | <u5HpE-62U-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1693641 |
On Fri 21-07-17 04:39:48, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 06:01:41PM +0800, Zhaoyang Huang wrote: > > we just record the cached_hole_size now, which will be used when > > the criteria meet both of 'free_vmap_cache == NULL' and 'size < > > cached_hole_size'. However, under above scenario, the search will > > start from the rb_root and then find the node which just in front > > of the cached hole. > > > > free_vmap_cache miss: > > vmap_area_root > > / \ > > _next U > > / (T1) > > cached_hole_node > > / > > ... (T2) > > / > > first > > > > vmap_area_list->first->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next > > |-------(T3)-------| | <<< cached_hole_size >>> | > > > > vmap_area_list->......->cached_hole_node->cached_hole_node.list.next > > | <<< cached_hole_size >>> | > > > > The time cost to search the node now is T = T1 + T2 + T3. > > The commit add a cached_hole_node here to record the one just in front of > > the cached_hole_size, which can help to avoid walking the rb tree and > > the list and make the T = 0; > > Yes, but does this matter in practice? Are there any workloads where > this makes a difference? If so, how much? I have already asked this and didn't get any response. There were other versions of a similar patch without a good clarification... Zhaoyang Huang, please try to formulate the problem you are fixing and why. While it is clear that you add _an_ optimization it is not really clear why we need it and whether it might adversely affect existing workloads. I would rather not touch this code unless there is a strong justification for it. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web