On Wed 17-02-21 11:08:15, Oscar Salvador wrote:
[...]
> +static bool alloc_and_dissolve_huge_page(struct hstate *h, struct page *page)
> +{
> + gfp_t gfp_mask = htlb_alloc_mask(h);
> + nodemask_t *nmask = &node_states[N_MEMORY];
> + struct page *new_page;
> + bool ret = false;
> + int nid;
> +
> + spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
> + /*
> + * Check one more time to make race-window smaller.
> + */
> + if (!PageHuge(page)) {
> + /*
> + * Dissolved from under our feet.
> + */
> + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> + return true;
> + }
Is this really necessary? dissolve_free_huge_page will take care of this
and the race windown you are covering is really tiny.
> +
> + nid = page_to_nid(page);
> + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> +
> + /*
> + * Before dissolving the page, we need to allocate a new one,
> + * so the pool remains stable.
> + */
> + new_page = alloc_fresh_huge_page(h, gfp_mask, nid, nmask, NULL);
wrt. fallback to other zones, I haven't realized that the primary
usecase is a form of memory offlining (from virt-mem). I am not yet sure
what the proper behavior is in that case but if breaking hugetlb pools,
similar to the normal hotplug operation, is viable then this needs a
special mode. We do not want a random alloc_contig_range user to do the
same. So for starter I would go with __GFP_THISNODE here.
> + if (new_page) {
> + /*
> + * Ok, we got a new free hugepage to replace this one. Try to
> + * dissolve the old page.
> + */
> + if (!dissolve_free_huge_page(page)) {
> + ret = true;
> + } else if (dissolve_free_huge_page(new_page)) {
> + /*
> + * Seems the old page could not be dissolved, so try to
> + * dissolve the freshly allocated page. If that fails
> + * too, let us count the new page as a surplus. Doing so
> + * allows the pool to be re-balanced when pages are freed
> + * instead of enqueued again.
> + */
> + spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
> + h->surplus_huge_pages++;
> + h->surplus_huge_pages_node[nid]++;
> + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> + }
> + /*
> + * Free it into the hugepage allocator
> + */
> + put_page(new_page);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> +bool isolate_or_dissolve_huge_page(struct page *page)
> +{
> + struct hstate *h = NULL;
> + struct page *head;
> + bool ret = false;
> +
> + spin_lock(&hugetlb_lock);
> + if (PageHuge(page)) {
> + head = compound_head(page);
> + h = page_hstate(head);
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&hugetlb_lock);
> +
> + if (!h)
> + /*
> + * The page might have been dissolved from under our feet.
> + * If that is the case, return success as if we dissolved it
> + * ourselves.
> + */
> + return true;
nit I would put the comment above the conditin for both cases. It reads
more easily that way. At least without { }.
> +
> + if (hstate_is_gigantic(h))
> + /*
> + * Fence off gigantic pages as there is a cyclic dependency
> + * between alloc_contig_range and them.
> + */
> + return ret;
> +
> + if(!page_count(head) && alloc_and_dissolve_huge_page(h, head))
> + ret = true;
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
> +
> struct page *alloc_huge_page(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long addr, int avoid_reserve)
> {
Other than that I haven't noticed any surprises.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
