On 10/04/2017 06:49 AM, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 10/04/2017 05:26 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote: >> At Plumbers this year, Guy Shattah and Christoph Lameter gave a presentation >> titled 'User space contiguous memory allocation for DMA' [1]. The slides >> point out the performance benefits of devices that can take advantage of >> larger physically contiguous areas. >> >> When such physically contiguous allocations are done today, they are done >> within drivers themselves in an ad-hoc manner. In addition to allocations >> for DMA, allocations of this type are also performed for buffers used by >> coprocessors and other acceleration engines. > > Right. > >> >> As mentioned in the presentation, posix specifies an interface to obtain >> physically contiguous memory. This is via typed memory objects as described >> in the posix_typed_mem_open() man page. Since Linux today does not follow >> the posix typed memory object model, adding infrastructure for contiguous >> memory allocations seems to be overkill. Instead, a proposal was suggested >> to add support via a mmap flag: MAP_CONTIG. > > Right. > >> >> mmap(MAP_CONTIG) would have the following semantics: >> - The entire mapping (length size) would be backed by physically contiguous >> pages. >> - If 'length' physically contiguous pages can not be allocated, then mmap >> will fail. >> - MAP_CONTIG only works with MAP_ANONYMOUS mappings. >> - MAP_CONTIG will lock the associated pages in memory. As such, the same >> privileges and limits that apply to mlock will also apply to MAP_CONTIG. >> - A MAP_CONTIG mapping can not be expanded. > > Why ? May be we have memory around the edge of the existing mapping. Why > give up before trying ? Just a simplification. If not to complicated, we could add support for expansion. But, it may not be worth the cost and I do not know if there would be any real use cases. >> - At fork time, private MAP_CONTIG mappings will be converted to regular >> (non-MAP_CONTIG) mapping in the child. As such a COW fault in the child >> will not require a contiguous allocation. > > Makes sense but need to be documented as the child still knows that the buffer > came from a mmap(MAP_CONTIG) call in the parent. > >> >> Some implementation considerations: >> - alloc_contig_range() or similar will be used for allocations larger >> than MAX_ORDER. > > As I had also mentioned during the presentation at Plumbers, there should be > a fallback approach while attempting to allocate the contiguous memory. > > - If order < MAX_ORDER -> alloc_pages() > - If order > MAX_ORDER -> alloc_contig_range() > - If alloc_contig_range() fails attempt a CMA based allocation scheme > The CMA area should have been initialized at the boot exclusively for > this purpose (may be with a CONFIG option if some one wants to go for > this fallback at all) and use cma_alloc() on that area when we need > to service MAP_CONTIG requests. I am not sure about the use of CMA and requiring admin setup. It is something that can be considered. However, I suspect people would want to avoid admin interaction/requirements if possible. >> - MAP_CONTIG should imply MAP_POPULATE. At mmap time, all pages for the >> mapping must be 'pre-allocated', and they can only be used for the mapping, >> so it makes sense to 'fault in' all pages. > > >> - Using 'pre-allocated' pages in the fault paths may be intrusive. > > But we have already faulted in all of them for the mapping and they > are also locked. Hence there should not be any page faults any more > for the VMA. Am I missing something here ? I was referring to the action of pre-populating the mapping. Today that is done via the normal fault paths. So, if we use this same scheme for MAP_CONTIG, the fault paths would need to know about pre-allocated pages. Sorry for not being more clear as that may have been a source of confusion. >> - We need to keep keep track of those pre-allocated pages until the vma is >> tore down, especially if free_contig_range() must be called > > Right, probably tracking them as part of the vm_area_struct itself. > >> >> Thoughts? >> - Is such an interface useful? >> - Any other ideas on how to achieve the same functionality? >> - Any thoughts on implementation? >> >> I have started down the path of pre-allocating contiguous pages at mmap >> time and hanging those off the vma(vm_private_data) with some kludges to >> use the pages at fault time. It is really ugly, which is why I am not >> sharing the code. Hoping for some comments/suggestions. > > I am still wondering why wait till fault time not pre fault all of them > and populate the page tables. Yes, that is the idea. I just did not state clearly above. -- Mike Kravetz -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
