On 2024/4/17 0:22, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-04-15 at 21:19 +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> The '(PAGE_SIZE < PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_SIZE)' case is for the
>> system with page size less than 32KB, which is 0x8000 bytes
>> requiring 16 bits space, change 'size' to 'size_mask' to avoid
>> using the MSB, and change 'pfmemalloc' field to reuse the that
>> MSB, so that we remove the orginal space needed by 'pfmemalloc'.
>>
>> For another case, the MSB of 'offset' is reused for 'pfmemalloc'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/page_frag_cache.h | 13 ++++++++-----
>> mm/page_frag_cache.c | 5 +++--
>> 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/page_frag_cache.h b/include/linux/page_frag_cache.h
>> index fe5faa80b6c3..40a7d6da9ef0 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/page_frag_cache.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/page_frag_cache.h
>> @@ -12,15 +12,16 @@ struct page_frag_cache {
>> void *va;
>> #if (PAGE_SIZE < PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_SIZE)
>> __u16 offset;
>> - __u16 size;
>> + __u16 size_mask:15;
>> + __u16 pfmemalloc:1;
>> #else
>> - __u32 offset;
>> + __u32 offset:31;
>> + __u32 pfmemalloc:1;
>> #endif
>
> This seems like a really bad idea. Using a bit-field like this seems
> like a waste as it means that all the accesses now have to add
> additional operations to access either offset or size. It wasn't as if
> this is an oversized struct, or one that we are allocating a ton of. As
> such I am not sure why we need to optmize for size like this.
For the old 'struct page_frag' use case, there is one 'struct page_frag'
for every socket and task_struct, there may be tens of thousands of
them even in a 32 bit sysmem, which might mean a lof of memory even for
a single byte saving, see patch 13.
>
>> /* we maintain a pagecount bias, so that we dont dirty cache line
>> * containing page->_refcount every time we allocate a fragment.
>> */
>> unsigned int pagecnt_bias;
>> - bool pfmemalloc;
>> };
