list_for_each_entry_safe() guarantees that we will never stumble over the
list head; "&page->lru != list" will always evaluate to true. Let's
simplify.
[david@redhat.com: Changelog refinements]
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200818084448.33969-1-richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
If we fail to decompress in zram it's a pretty serious problem. We were
entrusted to be able to decompress the old data but we failed. Either
we've got some crazy bug in the compression code or we've got memory
corruption.
At the moment, when this happens the log looks like this:
ERR kernel: [ 1833.099861] zram: Decompression failed! err=-22, page=336112
ERR kernel: [ 1833.099881] zram: Decompression failed! err=-22, page=336112
ALERT kernel: [ 1833.099886] Read-error on swap-device (253:0:2688896)
It is true that we have an "ALERT" level log in there, but (at least to
me) it feels like even this isn't enough to impart the seriousness of this
error. Let's convert to a WARN_ON. Note that WARN_ON is automatically
"unlikely" so we can simply replace the old annotation with the new one.
Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Acked-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
Cc: Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@chromium.org>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200917174059.1.If09c882545dbe432268f7a67a4d4cfcb6caace4f@changeid
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
__free_pages_core() is used when exposing fresh memory to the buddy during
system boot and when onlining memory in generic_online_page().
generic_online_page() is used in two cases:
1. Direct memory onlining in online_pages().
2. Deferred memory onlining in memory-ballooning-like mechanisms (HyperV
balloon and virtio-mem), when parts of a section are kept
fake-offline to be fake-onlined later on.
In 1, we already place pages to the tail of the freelist. Pages will be
freed to MIGRATE_ISOLATE lists first and moved to the tail of the
freelists via undo_isolate_page_range().
In 2, we currently don't implement a proper rule. In case of virtio-mem,
where we currently always online MAX_ORDER - 1 pages, the pages will be
placed to the HEAD of the freelist - undesireable. While the hyper-v
balloon calls generic_online_page() with single pages, usually it will
call it on successive single pages in a larger block.
The pages are fresh, so place them to the tail of the freelist and avoid
the PCP. In __free_pages_core(), remove the now superflouos call to
set_page_refcounted() and add a comment regarding page initialization and
the refcount.
Note: In 2. we currently don't shuffle. If ever relevant (page shuffling
is usually of limited use in virtualized environments), we might want to
shuffle after a sequence of generic_online_page() calls in the relevant
callers.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Acked-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Scott Cheloha <cheloha@linux.ibm.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005121534.15649-5-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Whenever we move pages between freelists via move_to_free_list()/
move_freepages_block(), we don't actually touch the pages:
1. Page isolation doesn't actually touch the pages, it simply isolates
pageblocks and moves all free pages to the MIGRATE_ISOLATE freelist.
When undoing isolation, we move the pages back to the target list.
2. Page stealing (steal_suitable_fallback()) moves free pages directly
between lists without touching them.
3. reserve_highatomic_pageblock()/unreserve_highatomic_pageblock() moves
free pages directly between freelists without touching them.
We already place pages to the tail of the freelists when undoing isolation
via __putback_isolated_page(), let's do it in any case (e.g., if order <=
pageblock_order) and document the behavior. To simplify, let's move the
pages to the tail for all move_to_free_list()/move_freepages_block() users.
In 2., the target list is empty, so there should be no change. In 3., we
might observe a change, however, highatomic is more concerned about
allocations succeeding than cache hotness - if we ever realize this change
degrades a workload, we can special-case this instance and add a proper
comment.
This change results in all pages getting onlined via online_pages() to be
placed to the tail of the freelist.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Acked-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Scott Cheloha <cheloha@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005121534.15649-4-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
__putback_isolated_page() already documents that pages will be placed to
the tail of the freelist - this is, however, not the case for "order >=
MAX_ORDER - 2" (see buddy_merge_likely()) - which should be the case for
all existing users.
This change affects two users:
- free page reporting
- page isolation, when undoing the isolation (including memory onlining).
This behavior is desirable for pages that haven't really been touched
lately, so exactly the two users that don't actually read/write page
content, but rather move untouched pages.
The new behavior is especially desirable for memory onlining, where we
allow allocation of newly onlined pages via undo_isolate_page_range() in
online_pages(). Right now, we always place them to the head of the
freelist, resulting in undesireable behavior: Assume we add individual
memory chunks via add_memory() and online them right away to the NORMAL
zone. We create a dependency chain of unmovable allocations e.g., via the
memmap. The memmap of the next chunk will be placed onto previous chunks
- if the last block cannot get offlined+removed, all dependent ones cannot
get offlined+removed. While this can already be observed with individual
DIMMs, it's more of an issue for virtio-mem (and I suspect also ppc
DLPAR).
Document that this should only be used for optimizations, and no code
should rely on this behavior for correction (if the order of the freelists
ever changes).
We won't care about page shuffling: memory onlining already properly
shuffles after onlining. free page reporting doesn't care about
physically contiguous ranges, and there are already cases where page
isolation will simply move (physically close) free pages to (currently)
the head of the freelists via move_freepages_block() instead of shuffling.
If this becomes ever relevant, we should shuffle the whole zone when
undoing isolation of larger ranges, and after free_contig_range().
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Reviewed-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Scott Cheloha <cheloha@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005121534.15649-3-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Patch series "mm: place pages to the freelist tail when onlining and undoing isolation", v2.
When adding separate memory blocks via add_memory*() and onlining them
immediately, the metadata (especially the memmap) of the next block will
be placed onto one of the just added+onlined block. This creates a chain
of unmovable allocations: If the last memory block cannot get
offlined+removed() so will all dependent ones. We directly have unmovable
allocations all over the place.
This can be observed quite easily using virtio-mem, however, it can also
be observed when using DIMMs. The freshly onlined pages will usually be
placed to the head of the freelists, meaning they will be allocated next,
turning the just-added memory usually immediately un-removable. The fresh
pages are cold, prefering to allocate others (that might be hot) also
feels to be the natural thing to do.
It also applies to the hyper-v balloon xen-balloon, and ppc64 dlpar: when
adding separate, successive memory blocks, each memory block will have
unmovable allocations on them - for example gigantic pages will fail to
allocate.
While the ZONE_NORMAL doesn't provide any guarantees that memory can get
offlined+removed again (any kind of fragmentation with unmovable
allocations is possible), there are many scenarios (hotplugging a lot of
memory, running workload, hotunplug some memory/as much as possible) where
we can offline+remove quite a lot with this patchset.
a) To visualize the problem, a very simple example:
Start a VM with 4GB and 8GB of virtio-mem memory:
[root@localhost ~]# lsmem
RANGE SIZE STATE REMOVABLE BLOCK
0x0000000000000000-0x00000000bfffffff 3G online yes 0-23
0x0000000100000000-0x000000033fffffff 9G online yes 32-103
Memory block size: 128M
Total online memory: 12G
Total offline memory: 0B
Then try to unplug as much as possible using virtio-mem. Observe which
memory blocks are still around. Without this patch set:
[root@localhost ~]# lsmem
RANGE SIZE STATE REMOVABLE BLOCK
0x0000000000000000-0x00000000bfffffff 3G online yes 0-23
0x0000000100000000-0x000000013fffffff 1G online yes 32-39
0x0000000148000000-0x000000014fffffff 128M online yes 41
0x0000000158000000-0x000000015fffffff 128M online yes 43
0x0000000168000000-0x000000016fffffff 128M online yes 45
0x0000000178000000-0x000000017fffffff 128M online yes 47
0x0000000188000000-0x0000000197ffffff 256M online yes 49-50
0x00000001a0000000-0x00000001a7ffffff 128M online yes 52
0x00000001b0000000-0x00000001b7ffffff 128M online yes 54
0x00000001c0000000-0x00000001c7ffffff 128M online yes 56
0x00000001d0000000-0x00000001d7ffffff 128M online yes 58
0x00000001e0000000-0x00000001e7ffffff 128M online yes 60
0x00000001f0000000-0x00000001f7ffffff 128M online yes 62
0x0000000200000000-0x0000000207ffffff 128M online yes 64
0x0000000210000000-0x0000000217ffffff 128M online yes 66
0x0000000220000000-0x0000000227ffffff 128M online yes 68
0x0000000230000000-0x0000000237ffffff 128M online yes 70
0x0000000240000000-0x0000000247ffffff 128M online yes 72
0x0000000250000000-0x0000000257ffffff 128M online yes 74
0x0000000260000000-0x0000000267ffffff 128M online yes 76
0x0000000270000000-0x0000000277ffffff 128M online yes 78
0x0000000280000000-0x0000000287ffffff 128M online yes 80
0x0000000290000000-0x0000000297ffffff 128M online yes 82
0x00000002a0000000-0x00000002a7ffffff 128M online yes 84
0x00000002b0000000-0x00000002b7ffffff 128M online yes 86
0x00000002c0000000-0x00000002c7ffffff 128M online yes 88
0x00000002d0000000-0x00000002d7ffffff 128M online yes 90
0x00000002e0000000-0x00000002e7ffffff 128M online yes 92
0x00000002f0000000-0x00000002f7ffffff 128M online yes 94
0x0000000300000000-0x0000000307ffffff 128M online yes 96
0x0000000310000000-0x0000000317ffffff 128M online yes 98
0x0000000320000000-0x0000000327ffffff 128M online yes 100
0x0000000330000000-0x000000033fffffff 256M online yes 102-103
Memory block size: 128M
Total online memory: 8.1G
Total offline memory: 0B
With this patch set:
[root@localhost ~]# lsmem
RANGE SIZE STATE REMOVABLE BLOCK
0x0000000000000000-0x00000000bfffffff 3G online yes 0-23
0x0000000100000000-0x000000013fffffff 1G online yes 32-39
Memory block size: 128M
Total online memory: 4G
Total offline memory: 0B
All memory can get unplugged, all memory block can get removed. Of
course, no workload ran and the system was basically idle, but it
highlights the issue - the fairly deterministic chain of unmovable
allocations. When a huge page for the 2MB memmap is needed, a
just-onlined 4MB page will be split. The remaining 2MB page will be used
for the memmap of the next memory block. So one memory block will hold
the memmap of the two following memory blocks. Finally the pages of the
last-onlined memory block will get used for the next bigger allocations -
if any allocation is unmovable, all dependent memory blocks cannot get
unplugged and removed until that allocation is gone.
Note that with bigger memory blocks (e.g., 256MB), *all* memory
blocks are dependent and none can get unplugged again!
b) Experiment with memory intensive workload
I performed an experiment with an older version of this patch set (before
we used undo_isolate_page_range() in online_pages(): Hotplug 56GB to a VM
with an initial 4GB, onlining all memory to ZONE_NORMAL right from the
kernel when adding it. I then run various memory intensive workloads that
consume most system memory for a total of 45 minutes. Once finished, I
try to unplug as much memory as possible.
With this change, I am able to remove via virtio-mem (adding individual
128MB memory blocks) 413 out of 448 added memory blocks. Via individual
(256MB) DIMMs 380 out of 448 added memory blocks. (I don't have any
numbers without this patchset, but looking at the above example, it's at
most half of the 448 memory blocks for virtio-mem, and most probably none
for DIMMs).
Again, there are workloads that might behave very differently due to the
nature of ZONE_NORMAL.
This change also affects (besides memory onlining):
- Other users of undo_isolate_page_range(): Pages are always placed to the
tail.
-- When memory offlining fails
-- When memory isolation fails after having isolated some pageblocks
-- When alloc_contig_range() either succeeds or fails
- Other users of __putback_isolated_page(): Pages are always placed to the
tail.
-- Free page reporting
- Other users of __free_pages_core()
-- AFAIKs, any memory that is getting exposed to the buddy during boot.
IIUC we will now usually allocate memory from lower addresses within
a zone first (especially during boot).
- Other users of generic_online_page()
-- Hyper-V balloon
This patch (of 5):
Let's prepare for additional flags and avoid long parameter lists of
bools. Follow-up patches will also make use of the flags in
__free_pages_ok().
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Reviewed-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Scott Cheloha <cheloha@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005121534.15649-1-david@redhat.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201005121534.15649-2-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
virtio-mem adds memory in memory block granularity, to be able to remove
it in the same granularity again later, and to grow slowly on demand.
This, however, results in quite a lot of resources when adding a lot of
memory. Resources are effectively stored in a list-based tree. Having a
lot of resources not only wastes memory, it also makes traversing that
tree more expensive, and makes /proc/iomem explode in size (e.g.,
requiring kexec-tools to manually merge resources later when e.g., trying
to create a kdump header).
Before this patch, we get (/proc/iomem) when hotplugging 2G via virtio-mem
on x86-64:
[...]
100000000-13fffffff : System RAM
140000000-33fffffff : virtio0
140000000-147ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
148000000-14fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
150000000-157ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
158000000-15fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
160000000-167ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
168000000-16fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
170000000-177ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
178000000-17fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
180000000-187ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
188000000-18fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
190000000-197ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
198000000-19fffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
1a0000000-1a7ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
1a8000000-1afffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
1b0000000-1b7ffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
1b8000000-1bfffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
3280000000-32ffffffff : PCI Bus 0000:00
With this patch, we get (/proc/iomem):
[...]
fffc0000-ffffffff : Reserved
100000000-13fffffff : System RAM
140000000-33fffffff : virtio0
140000000-1bfffffff : System RAM (virtio_mem)
3280000000-32ffffffff : PCI Bus 0000:00
Of course, with more hotplugged memory, it gets worse. When unplugging
memory blocks again, try_remove_memory() (via offline_and_remove_memory())
will properly split the resource up again.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@ozlabs.org>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>
Cc: Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@microsoft.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>
Cc: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>
Cc: Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@microsoft.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leobras.c@gmail.com>
Cc: Libor Pechacek <lpechacek@suse.cz>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
Cc: Wei Liu <wei.liu@kernel.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200911103459.10306-7-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
We make sure that we cannot have any memory holes right at the beginning
of offline_pages(). We no longer need walk_system_ram_range() and can
call test_pages_isolated() and __offline_isolated_pages() directly.
offlined_pages always corresponds to nr_pages, so we can simplify that.
[akpm@linux-foundation.org: patch conflict resolution]
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Charan Teja Reddy <charante@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@deltatee.com>
Cc: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200819175957.28465-4-david@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
