On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 3:34 AM Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Currently memmap_init_zone_device() ends up initializing 32768 pages
> when it only needs to initialize 128 given tail page reuse. That
> number is worse with 1GB compound pages, 262144 instead of 128. Update
> memmap_init_zone_device() to skip redundant initialization, detailed
> below.
>
> When a pgmap @vmemmap_shift is set, all pages are mapped at a given
> huge page alignment and use compound pages to describe them as opposed
> to a struct per 4K.
>
> With @vmemmap_shift > 0 and when struct pages are stored in ram
> (!altmap) most tail pages are reused. Consequently, the amount of
> unique struct pages is a lot smaller that the total amount of struct
> pages being mapped.
>
> The altmap path is left alone since it does not support memory savings
> based on compound pages devmap.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index cface1d38093..c10df2fd0ec2 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -6666,6 +6666,20 @@ static void __ref __init_zone_device_page(struct page *page, unsigned long pfn,
> }
> }
>
> +/*
> + * With compound page geometry and when struct pages are stored in ram most
> + * tail pages are reused. Consequently, the amount of unique struct pages to
> + * initialize is a lot smaller that the total amount of struct pages being
> + * mapped. This is a paired / mild layering violation with explicit knowledge
> + * of how the sparse_vmemmap internals handle compound pages in the lack
> + * of an altmap. See vmemmap_populate_compound_pages().
> + */
> +static inline unsigned long compound_nr_pages(struct vmem_altmap *altmap,
> + unsigned long nr_pages)
> +{
> + return !altmap ? 2 * (PAGE_SIZE/sizeof(struct page)) : nr_pages;
> +}
> +
This means only the first 2 pages will be modified, the reset 6 or 4094 pages
do not. In the HugeTLB case, those tail pages are mapped with read-only
to catch invalid usage on tail pages (e.g. write operations). Quick question:
should we also do similar things on DAX?
Thanks.
