Re: [RFC PATCH 09/15] virtio: virtio_mem: use PAGES_PER_SECTION instead of MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES
From: David Hildenbrand <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-09 07:35:22
Also in:
lkml, virtualization
On 05.08.21 21:02, Zi Yan wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> It keeps the existing behavior when MAX_ORDER grows beyond a section size. Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com> Cc: David Hildenbrand <redacted> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> Cc: virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c index 19036922f7ef..bab5a81fa796 100644 --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_mem.c@@ -1105,11 +1105,11 @@ static void virtio_mem_clear_fake_offline(unsigned long pfn, */ static void virtio_mem_fake_online(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) { - const unsigned long max_nr_pages = MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES; + const unsigned long max_nr_pages = PAGES_PER_SECTION; unsigned long i; /* - * We are always called at least with MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES + * We are always called at least with PAGES_PER_SECTION * granularity/alignment (e.g., the way subblocks work). All pages * inside such a block are alike. */@@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ static void virtio_mem_fake_online(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages) if (PageDirty(page)) { virtio_mem_clear_fake_offline(pfn + i, max_nr_pages, false); - generic_online_page(page, MAX_ORDER - 1); + generic_online_page(page, PAGES_PER_SECTION - 1); } else { virtio_mem_clear_fake_offline(pfn + i, max_nr_pages, true);@@ -1228,7 +1228,7 @@ static void virtio_mem_online_page_cb(struct page *page, unsigned int order) if (vm->in_sbm) { /* * We exploit here that subblocks have at least - * MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES size/alignment - so we cannot + * PAGES_PER_SECTION size/alignment - so we cannot * cross subblocks within one call. */ id = virtio_mem_phys_to_mb_id(addr);@@ -2438,14 +2438,14 @@ static int virtio_mem_init(struct virtio_mem *vm) VIRTIO_MEM_DEFAULT_OFFLINE_THRESHOLD); /* - * We want subblocks to span at least MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES and + * We want subblocks to span at least PAGES_PER_SECTION and * pageblock_nr_pages pages. This: * - Simplifies our page onlining code (virtio_mem_online_page_cb) * and fake page onlining code (virtio_mem_fake_online). * - Is required for now for alloc_contig_range() to work reliably - * it doesn't properly handle smaller granularity on ZONE_NORMAL. */ - sb_size = max_t(uint64_t, MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES, + sb_size = max_t(uint64_t, PAGES_PER_SECTION, pageblock_nr_pages) * PAGE_SIZE; sb_size = max_t(uint64_t, vm->device_block_size, sb_size);
This is very much completely broken and destroys most of the purpose of virtio-mem. It even is broken once MAX_ORDER would exceed a single memory section I think. Whatever you do, keep virtio-mem working *as is* unless someone explicitly sets MAX_ORDER on the command line to something bigger. virtio-mem will require some minor adjustments once MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES would exceed the memory section size -- the functionality will, however, be heavily degraded once you increase MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES in any way (again, which is fine if it's explicitly done by an admin on the command line). As mentioned somewhere else already, we'll have to tackle alloc_contig_range() to properly deal with pageblock_order granularity, then we can rework virtio-mem code to be based on that instead of MAX_ORDER - 1. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb