From patchwork Tue Jul 9 13:27:34 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Yunsheng Lin X-Patchwork-Id: 13727979 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD755C2BD09 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:31:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id E8F0C6B00C5; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:31:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E3F5F6B00C6; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:31:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CDE8D6B00C7; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:31:23 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6476B00C5 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 09:31:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin17.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73174806A3 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:31:23 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 82320300846.17.40DC577 Received: from szxga08-in.huawei.com (szxga08-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.255]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA58740028 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 13:31:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of linyunsheng@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.255 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linyunsheng@huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1720531856; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=u8QIqUQsFZUNYICpBcI8ErYE8MgK8ivPyhDi+3WIwshqOgmHgzQZGf+q77MlHyQJQl+JBB Q/SfEiP6Q+q8sFfVRXxbeHFqyNNQGuhm6BBLqLujAnPPibD2rgPZRmmqu8R//yJELj9+h4 xT5EL9LfXMHMhz30lmr+EWOeTdedVWM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of linyunsheng@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.255 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linyunsheng@huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1720531856; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=dP19KnYEWTCM285a5LBgtLZQdy2OnFvx+h8KX6f4o6I=; b=pKHagr3R+IYcAwpmQrhAGOcyLOk7cDwRsKT+JtjNZe39hPmHps/mKf3uYMdQM/yPkjh29Z lKXIJBXgMgxeT7JB6rMdccP9GWAkgjSB75PjPylZEmIMaTe0iud+B1juKLxuu4kyx50W6T vevyXweBuDQr5QGpq0aR2hivDxenN1o= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.48]) by szxga08-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4WJMG31zlhz1T5Xw; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 21:26:35 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.61]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A14F7180064; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 21:31:16 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (10.69.192.56) by dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.61) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 21:31:16 +0800 From: Yunsheng Lin To: , , CC: , , Yunsheng Lin , Alexander Duyck , Andrew Morton , Subject: [PATCH net-next v10 09/15] mm: page_frag: use __alloc_pages() to replace alloc_pages_node() Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 21:27:34 +0800 Message-ID: <20240709132741.47751-10-linyunsheng@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.33.0 In-Reply-To: <20240709132741.47751-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com> References: <20240709132741.47751-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [10.69.192.56] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To dggpemf200006.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.61) X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: DA58740028 X-Stat-Signature: 5qq8mxhc9u3pzb9uhwi4dr79n9kx16i6 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1720531880-826147 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX18a3nGO4a+BnCb8RG1wsRA7tBoh91H/MtQw01wWpUX22dCrdbHWjAkwSBbElm78UTsxtr8fuehsuD9mIh8NVyGrO7yaIh6JwF24kTb0wh7gZxWgGTdh5Ta7livWy6Oc/l+XLRtXczCm3F8O56ieRGvE5m9kbK+BFSXLRYplNKNPNMf1e+e9hgsrKF+0iTzFi86VULZtnogGxZ/oQn6dnvzvmjFozv7uPWfjT8AYoGliyI+G6zWyVIRvBhp7nkSJtse/Yc1NcXsvYKe052HD7jTnM8QrwVIAfZoiuhXp2gm5Lg6zHeD79j9FRZgTO9sn/xA9kf84iWvexDjgkAkW42LnYLOf0rHRgbFpSwb9UIN5fEl83oOsZuybOpxT3V2KLdFc13RxhZys2/vcN4BpWVKAmC8plVhRUGrKbrA355E3Z0wgMN20+/3FdDW6EHjNTIh1SslY40LT2pyZDjlArsa/qpwvmaMkQ60XOpXiHsYaQxHI1bzykWYnXhxaXCO/FL3Dw3zwfT36PgTeGy8lCDDBLFEJYXzsQkJSs+tBhvEFILnVKRe1yrdOSOBdALC+zzze9S5iokR3qEtqiUX3pxmO+M+eh+5TefYtO+SnZNH/7ozcan5v9NtaEBYz1ebSvVeo8xmuPgBSQgh5rNxx4ab5rzoPUlLUWgC0c9v7oQmQlDqFVUBtjZWnbD5PW8MO62fyP20Gqya4Z8L+LuhXkbx0GyefgD1tWKxc2m83CQ7YXva3UfUFhrgOMFo6b9H4ud6KT2XBFWdBbpT2VJ0PZXqMQVxKGuW0VTT3dKbjNHCw5g5ezWoSO4Lkdl3LBUEjyT+QyfLixd78dmDQ4D2OaognkoWQhuNY6tfFg6l/E/UKHZaT30II0hhMN8hpKQ442VHYJLrc+jodYx03Btp4CwoWSyYgOGOOGtO/jYXpfBrp9VFHq/4L1DgfsAjLAs270qy9VL8RjcO ztx2tn2Z QvujK1MNb6aztn5nj3kN1WqwC9Dh4KAaijiuyHPwqo78sEYpYep928oFiRJlDZDoTVPv7vqTM39u+aER6nVSF6IZ6YPgnuQHvz+acvIKLXE80pCLqGaUkjw/VIB3EgpsGKSkaQaIQM4b5prDDhvqaTchSAXTHrgN1WyQckG7LTRQYXhVwTzrL4reNr9mKFLU8scgUa9Yep4y6PUsqAQIkbKgxRoElk2Op3NdL+Xg/Rd0Da47AF42+gW644K0xnfeZGQ/Jnspdb+sdV7mdu6uLdtfsNkIiuvt2vY8o X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: There are more new APIs calling __page_frag_cache_refill() in this patchset, which may cause compiler not being able to inline __page_frag_cache_refill() into __page_frag_alloc_va_align(). Not being able to do the inlining seems to casue some notiable performance degradation in arm64 system with 64K PAGE_SIZE after adding new API calling __page_frag_cache_refill(). It seems there is about 24Bytes binary size increase for __page_frag_cache_refill() and __page_frag_cache_refill() in arm64 system with 64K PAGE_SIZE. By doing the gdb disassembling, It seems we can have more than 100Bytes decrease for the binary size by using __alloc_pages() to replace alloc_pages_node(), as there seems to be some unnecessary checking for nid being NUMA_NO_NODE, especially when page_frag is still part of the mm system. CC: Alexander Duyck Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin --- mm/page_frag_cache.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/page_frag_cache.c b/mm/page_frag_cache.c index 73164d2482f8..b2cb4473db54 100644 --- a/mm/page_frag_cache.c +++ b/mm/page_frag_cache.c @@ -59,11 +59,11 @@ static struct page *__page_frag_cache_refill(struct page_frag_cache *nc, #if (PAGE_SIZE < PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_SIZE) gfp_mask = (gfp_mask & ~__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM) | __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NORETRY | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC; - page = alloc_pages_node(NUMA_NO_NODE, gfp_mask, - PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_ORDER); + page = __alloc_pages(gfp_mask, PAGE_FRAG_CACHE_MAX_ORDER, + numa_mem_id(), NULL); #endif if (unlikely(!page)) { - page = alloc_pages_node(NUMA_NO_NODE, gfp, 0); + page = __alloc_pages(gfp, 0, numa_mem_id(), NULL); if (unlikely(!page)) { memset(nc, 0, sizeof(*nc)); return NULL;