Re: [PATCH 4/8] asm-generic: pgalloc: provide generic pmd_alloc_one() and pmd_free_one()

[Mike Rapoport <rppt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 08:03:04PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 05:34:49PM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > More elaborate versions on arm64 and x86 account memory for the user page
> > tables and call to pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() as the part of PMD page
> > initialization.
> > 
> > Move the arm64 version to include/asm-generic/pgalloc.h and use the generic
> > version on several architectures.
> > 
> > The pgtable_pmd_page_ctor() is a NOP when ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK is
> > not enabled, so there is no functional change for most architectures except
> > of the addition of __GFP_ACCOUNT for allocation of user page tables.
> 
> Thanks for including this line; it reminded me that we're not setting
> the PageTable flag on the page, nor accounting it to the zone page stats.
> Hope you don't mind me tagging a patch to do that on as 9/8.
> 
> We could also do with a pud_page_[cd]tor and maybe even p4d/pgd versions.
> But that brings me to the next question -- could/should some of this
> be moved over to asm-generic/pgalloc.h?  The ctor/dtor aren't called
> from anywhere else, and there's value to reducing the total amount of
> code in mm.h, but then there's also value to keeping all the ifdef
> ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK code together too.  So I'm a bit torn.
> What do you think?

There are arhcitectures that don't use asm-generic/pgalloc.h but rather
have their own, sometimes completely different, versoins of these
funcitons.

I've tried adding linux/pgalloc.h, but I've ended up with contradicting
need to include asm/pgalloc.h before the generic code for some
architecures or after the generic code for others :)

I think let's leave it in mm.h for now, maybe after several more cleaups
we could do better.

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.