linux/lib/bitmap.c

1185 lines
36 KiB

lib: bitmap: change bitmap_shift_right to take unsigned parameters I've previously changed the nbits parameter of most bitmap_* functions to unsigned; now it is bitmap_shift_{left,right}'s turn. This alone saves some .text, but while at it I found that there were a few other things one could do. The end result of these seven patches is $ scripts/bloat-o-meter /tmp/bitmap.o.{old,new} add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-328 (-328) function old new delta __bitmap_shift_right 384 226 -158 __bitmap_shift_left 306 136 -170 and less importantly also a smaller stack footprint $ stack-o-meter.pl master bitmap file function old new delta lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_right 24 8 -16 lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_left 24 0 -24 For each pair of 0 <= shift <= nbits <= 256 I've tested the end result with a few randomly filled src buffers (including garbage beyond nbits), in each case verifying that the shift {left,right}-most bits of dst are zero and the remaining nbits-shift bits correspond to src, so I'm fairly confident I didn't screw up. That hasn't stopped me from being wrong before, though. This patch (of 7): gcc can generate slightly better code for stuff like "nbits % BITS_PER_LONG" when it knows nbits is not negative. Since negative size bitmaps or shift amounts don't make sense, change these parameters of bitmap_shift_right to unsigned. The expressions involving "lim - 1" are still ok, since if lim is 0 the loop is never executed. Also use "shift" and "nbits" consistently for the parameter names. Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-02-13 14:36:02 -08:00
lib: bitmap: change bitmap_shift_right to take unsigned parameters I've previously changed the nbits parameter of most bitmap_* functions to unsigned; now it is bitmap_shift_{left,right}'s turn. This alone saves some .text, but while at it I found that there were a few other things one could do. The end result of these seven patches is $ scripts/bloat-o-meter /tmp/bitmap.o.{old,new} add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-328 (-328) function old new delta __bitmap_shift_right 384 226 -158 __bitmap_shift_left 306 136 -170 and less importantly also a smaller stack footprint $ stack-o-meter.pl master bitmap file function old new delta lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_right 24 8 -16 lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_left 24 0 -24 For each pair of 0 <= shift <= nbits <= 256 I've tested the end result with a few randomly filled src buffers (including garbage beyond nbits), in each case verifying that the shift {left,right}-most bits of dst are zero and the remaining nbits-shift bits correspond to src, so I'm fairly confident I didn't screw up. That hasn't stopped me from being wrong before, though. This patch (of 7): gcc can generate slightly better code for stuff like "nbits % BITS_PER_LONG" when it knows nbits is not negative. Since negative size bitmaps or shift amounts don't make sense, change these parameters of bitmap_shift_right to unsigned. The expressions involving "lim - 1" are still ok, since if lim is 0 the loop is never executed. Also use "shift" and "nbits" consistently for the parameter names. Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-02-13 14:36:02 -08:00
lib: bitmap: change bitmap_shift_right to take unsigned parameters I've previously changed the nbits parameter of most bitmap_* functions to unsigned; now it is bitmap_shift_{left,right}'s turn. This alone saves some .text, but while at it I found that there were a few other things one could do. The end result of these seven patches is $ scripts/bloat-o-meter /tmp/bitmap.o.{old,new} add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-328 (-328) function old new delta __bitmap_shift_right 384 226 -158 __bitmap_shift_left 306 136 -170 and less importantly also a smaller stack footprint $ stack-o-meter.pl master bitmap file function old new delta lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_right 24 8 -16 lib/bitmap.o __bitmap_shift_left 24 0 -24 For each pair of 0 <= shift <= nbits <= 256 I've tested the end result with a few randomly filled src buffers (including garbage beyond nbits), in each case verifying that the shift {left,right}-most bits of dst are zero and the remaining nbits-shift bits correspond to src, so I'm fairly confident I didn't screw up. That hasn't stopped me from being wrong before, though. This patch (of 7): gcc can generate slightly better code for stuff like "nbits % BITS_PER_LONG" when it knows nbits is not negative. Since negative size bitmaps or shift amounts don't make sense, change these parameters of bitmap_shift_right to unsigned. The expressions involving "lim - 1" are still ok, since if lim is 0 the loop is never executed. Also use "shift" and "nbits" consistently for the parameter names. Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2015-02-13 14:36:02 -08:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
lib/bitmap.c: make bitmap_parselist() thread-safe and much faster Current implementation of bitmap_parselist() uses a static variable to save local state while setting bits in the bitmap. It is obviously wrong if we assume execution in multiprocessor environment. Fortunately, it's possible to rewrite this portion of code to avoid using the static variable. It is also possible to set bits in the mask per-range with bitmap_set(), not per-bit, as it is implemented now, with set_bit(); which is way faster. The important side effect of this change is that setting bits in this function from now is not per-bit atomic and less memory-ordered. This is because set_bit() guarantees the order of memory accesses, while bitmap_set() does not. I think that it is the advantage of the new approach, because the bitmap_parselist() is intended to initialise bit arrays, and user should protect the whole bitmap during initialisation if needed. So protecting individual bits looks expensive and useless. Also, other range-oriented functions in lib/bitmap.c don't worry much about atomicity. With all that, setting 2k bits in map with the pattern like 0-2047:128/256 becomes ~50 times faster after applying the patch in my testing environment (arm64 hosted on qemu). The second patch of the series adds the test for bitmap_parselist(). It's not intended to cover all tricky cases, just to make sure that I didn't screw up during rework. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170807225438.16161-1-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: Noam Camus <noamca@mellanox.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-08 16:15:34 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
lib/bitmap.c: make bitmap_parselist() thread-safe and much faster Current implementation of bitmap_parselist() uses a static variable to save local state while setting bits in the bitmap. It is obviously wrong if we assume execution in multiprocessor environment. Fortunately, it's possible to rewrite this portion of code to avoid using the static variable. It is also possible to set bits in the mask per-range with bitmap_set(), not per-bit, as it is implemented now, with set_bit(); which is way faster. The important side effect of this change is that setting bits in this function from now is not per-bit atomic and less memory-ordered. This is because set_bit() guarantees the order of memory accesses, while bitmap_set() does not. I think that it is the advantage of the new approach, because the bitmap_parselist() is intended to initialise bit arrays, and user should protect the whole bitmap during initialisation if needed. So protecting individual bits looks expensive and useless. Also, other range-oriented functions in lib/bitmap.c don't worry much about atomicity. With all that, setting 2k bits in map with the pattern like 0-2047:128/256 becomes ~50 times faster after applying the patch in my testing environment (arm64 hosted on qemu). The second patch of the series adds the test for bitmap_parselist(). It's not intended to cover all tricky cases, just to make sure that I didn't screw up during rework. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170807225438.16161-1-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: Noam Camus <noamca@mellanox.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-08 16:15:34 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
2016-10-11 13:51:35 -07:00
lib/bitmap.c: make bitmap_parselist() thread-safe and much faster Current implementation of bitmap_parselist() uses a static variable to save local state while setting bits in the bitmap. It is obviously wrong if we assume execution in multiprocessor environment. Fortunately, it's possible to rewrite this portion of code to avoid using the static variable. It is also possible to set bits in the mask per-range with bitmap_set(), not per-bit, as it is implemented now, with set_bit(); which is way faster. The important side effect of this change is that setting bits in this function from now is not per-bit atomic and less memory-ordered. This is because set_bit() guarantees the order of memory accesses, while bitmap_set() does not. I think that it is the advantage of the new approach, because the bitmap_parselist() is intended to initialise bit arrays, and user should protect the whole bitmap during initialisation if needed. So protecting individual bits looks expensive and useless. Also, other range-oriented functions in lib/bitmap.c don't worry much about atomicity. With all that, setting 2k bits in map with the pattern like 0-2047:128/256 becomes ~50 times faster after applying the patch in my testing environment (arm64 hosted on qemu). The second patch of the series adds the test for bitmap_parselist(). It's not intended to cover all tricky cases, just to make sure that I didn't screw up during rework. Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170807225438.16161-1-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: Noam Camus <noamca@mellanox.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com> Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-09-08 16:15:34 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
mempolicy: add bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold() operations The following adds two more bitmap operators, bitmap_onto() and bitmap_fold(), with the usual cpumask and nodemask wrappers. The bitmap_onto() operator computes one bitmap relative to another. If the n-th bit in the origin mask is set, then the m-th bit of the destination mask will be set, where m is the position of the n-th set bit in the relative mask. The bitmap_fold() operator folds a bitmap into a second that has bit m set iff the input bitmap has some bit n set, where m == n mod sz, for the specified sz value. There are two substantive changes between this patch and its predecessor bitmap_relative: 1) Renamed bitmap_relative() to be bitmap_onto(). 2) Added bitmap_fold(). The essential motivation for bitmap_onto() is to provide a mechanism for converting a cpuset-relative CPU or Node mask to an absolute mask. Cpuset relative masks are written as if the current task were in a cpuset whose CPUs or Nodes were just the consecutive ones numbered 0..N-1, for some N. The bitmap_onto() operator is provided in anticipation of adding support for the first such cpuset relative mask, by the mbind() and set_mempolicy() system calls, using a planned flag of MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES. These bitmap operators (and their nodemask wrappers, in particular) will be used in code that converts the user specified cpuset relative memory policy to a specific system node numbered policy, given the current mems_allowed of the tasks cpuset. Such cpuset relative mempolicies will address two deficiencies of the existing interface between cpusets and mempolicies: 1) A task cannot at present reliably establish a cpuset relative mempolicy because there is an essential race condition, in that the tasks cpuset may be changed in between the time the task can query its cpuset placement, and the time the task can issue the applicable mbind or set_memplicy system call. 2) A task cannot at present establish what cpuset relative mempolicy it would like to have, if it is in a smaller cpuset than it might have mempolicy preferences for, because the existing interface only allows specifying mempolicies for nodes currently allowed by the cpuset. Cpuset relative mempolicies are useful for tasks that don't distinguish particularly between one CPU or Node and another, but only between how many of each are allowed, and the proper placement of threads and memory pages on the various CPUs and Nodes available. The motivation for the added bitmap_fold() can be seen in the following example. Let's say an application has specified some mempolicies that presume 16 memory nodes, including say a mempolicy that specified MPOL_F_RELATIVE_NODES (cpuset relative) nodes 12-15. Then lets say that application is crammed into a cpuset that only has 8 memory nodes, 0-7. If one just uses bitmap_onto(), this mempolicy, mapped to that cpuset, would ignore the requested relative nodes above 7, leaving it empty of nodes. That's not good; better to fold the higher nodes down, so that some nodes are included in the resulting mapped mempolicy. In this case, the mempolicy nodes 12-15 are taken modulo 8 (the weight of the mems_allowed of the confining cpuset), resulting in a mempolicy specifying nodes 4-7. Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> Cc: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> Cc: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie> Cc: Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com> Cc: <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: <ray-lk@madrabbit.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-28 02:12:29 -07:00
[PATCH] bitmap: region cleanup Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> says: This patch set implements a number of patches to clean up and restructure the bitmap region code, in addition to extending the interface to support multiword spanning allocations. The current implementation (before this patch set) is limited by only being able to allocate pages <= BITS_PER_LONG, as noted by the strategically positioned BUG_ON() at lib/bitmap.c:752: /* We don't do regions of pages > BITS_PER_LONG. The * algorithm would be a simple look for multiple zeros in the * array, but there's no driver today that needs this. If you * trip this BUG(), you get to code it... */ BUG_ON(pages > BITS_PER_LONG); As I seem to have been the first person to trigger this, the result ends up being the following patch set with the help of Paul Jackson. The final patch in the series eliminates quite a bit of code duplication, so the bitmap code size ends up being smaller than the current implementation as an added bonus. After these are applied, it should already be possible to do multiword allocations with dma_alloc_coherent() out of ranges established by dma_declare_coherent_memory() on x86 without having to change any of the code, and the SH store queue API will follow up on this as the other user that needs support for this. This patch: Some code cleanup on the lib/bitmap.c bitmap_*_region() routines: * spacing * variable names * comments Has no change to code function. Signed-off-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-24 03:15:44 -08:00
[PATCH] bitmap: region cleanup Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> says: This patch set implements a number of patches to clean up and restructure the bitmap region code, in addition to extending the interface to support multiword spanning allocations. The current implementation (before this patch set) is limited by only being able to allocate pages <= BITS_PER_LONG, as noted by the strategically positioned BUG_ON() at lib/bitmap.c:752: /* We don't do regions of pages > BITS_PER_LONG. The * algorithm would be a simple look for multiple zeros in the * array, but there's no driver today that needs this. If you * trip this BUG(), you get to code it... */ BUG_ON(pages > BITS_PER_LONG); As I seem to have been the first person to trigger this, the result ends up being the following patch set with the help of Paul Jackson. The final patch in the series eliminates quite a bit of code duplication, so the bitmap code size ends up being smaller than the current implementation as an added bonus. After these are applied, it should already be possible to do multiword allocations with dma_alloc_coherent() out of ranges established by dma_declare_coherent_memory() on x86 without having to change any of the code, and the SH store queue API will follow up on this as the other user that needs support for this. This patch: Some code cleanup on the lib/bitmap.c bitmap_*_region() routines: * spacing * variable names * comments Has no change to code function. Signed-off-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-24 03:15:44 -08:00
[PATCH] bitmap: region cleanup Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> says: This patch set implements a number of patches to clean up and restructure the bitmap region code, in addition to extending the interface to support multiword spanning allocations. The current implementation (before this patch set) is limited by only being able to allocate pages <= BITS_PER_LONG, as noted by the strategically positioned BUG_ON() at lib/bitmap.c:752: /* We don't do regions of pages > BITS_PER_LONG. The * algorithm would be a simple look for multiple zeros in the * array, but there's no driver today that needs this. If you * trip this BUG(), you get to code it... */ BUG_ON(pages > BITS_PER_LONG); As I seem to have been the first person to trigger this, the result ends up being the following patch set with the help of Paul Jackson. The final patch in the series eliminates quite a bit of code duplication, so the bitmap code size ends up being smaller than the current implementation as an added bonus. After these are applied, it should already be possible to do multiword allocations with dma_alloc_coherent() out of ranges established by dma_declare_coherent_memory() on x86 without having to change any of the code, and the SH store queue API will follow up on this as the other user that needs support for this. This patch: Some code cleanup on the lib/bitmap.c bitmap_*_region() routines: * spacing * variable names * comments Has no change to code function. Signed-off-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-24 03:15:44 -08:00
[PATCH] bitmap: region cleanup Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> says: This patch set implements a number of patches to clean up and restructure the bitmap region code, in addition to extending the interface to support multiword spanning allocations. The current implementation (before this patch set) is limited by only being able to allocate pages <= BITS_PER_LONG, as noted by the strategically positioned BUG_ON() at lib/bitmap.c:752: /* We don't do regions of pages > BITS_PER_LONG. The * algorithm would be a simple look for multiple zeros in the * array, but there's no driver today that needs this. If you * trip this BUG(), you get to code it... */ BUG_ON(pages > BITS_PER_LONG); As I seem to have been the first person to trigger this, the result ends up being the following patch set with the help of Paul Jackson. The final patch in the series eliminates quite a bit of code duplication, so the bitmap code size ends up being smaller than the current implementation as an added bonus. After these are applied, it should already be possible to do multiword allocations with dma_alloc_coherent() out of ranges established by dma_declare_coherent_memory() on x86 without having to change any of the code, and the SH store queue API will follow up on this as the other user that needs support for this. This patch: Some code cleanup on the lib/bitmap.c bitmap_*_region() routines: * spacing * variable names * comments Has no change to code function. Signed-off-by: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org> Signed-off-by: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2006-03-24 03:15:44 -08:00
bitmap: new bitmap_copy_safe and bitmap_{from,to}_arr32 This patchset replaces bitmap_{to,from}_u32array with more simple and standard looking copy-like functions. bitmap_from_u32array() takes 4 arguments (bitmap_to_u32array is similar): - unsigned long *bitmap, which is destination; - unsigned int nbits, the length of destination bitmap, in bits; - const u32 *buf, the source; and - unsigned int nwords, the length of source buffer in ints. In description to the function it is detailed like: * copy min(nbits, 32*nwords) bits from @buf to @bitmap, remaining * bits between nword and nbits in @bitmap (if any) are cleared. Having two size arguments looks unneeded and potentially dangerous. It is unneeded because normally user of copy-like function should take care of the size of destination and make it big enough to fit source data. And it is dangerous because function may hide possible error if user doesn't provide big enough bitmap, and data becomes silently dropped. That's why all copy-like functions have 1 argument for size of copying data, and I don't see any reason to make bitmap_from_u32array() different. One exception that comes in mind is strncpy() which also provides size of destination in arguments, but it's strongly argued by the possibility of taking broken strings in source. This is not the case of bitmap_{from,to}_u32array(). There is no many real users of bitmap_{from,to}_u32array(), and they all very clearly provide size of destination matched with the size of source, so additional functionality is not used in fact. Like this: bitmap_from_u32array(to->link_modes.supported, __ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_MASK_NBITS, link_usettings.link_modes.supported, __ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_MASK_NU32); Where: #define __ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_MASK_NU32 \ DIV_ROUND_UP(__ETHTOOL_LINK_MODE_MASK_NBITS, 32) In this patch, bitmap_copy_safe and bitmap_{from,to}_arr32 are introduced. 'Safe' in bitmap_copy_safe() stands for clearing unused bits in bitmap beyond last bit till the end of last word. It is useful for hardening API when bitmap is assumed to be exposed to userspace. bitmap_{from,to}_arr32 functions are replacements for bitmap_{from,to}_u32array. They don't take unneeded nwords argument, and so simpler in implementation and understanding. This patch suggests optimization for 32-bit systems - aliasing bitmap_{from,to}_arr32 to bitmap_copy_safe. Other possible optimization is aliasing 64-bit LE bitmap_{from,to}_arr32 to more generic function(s). But I didn't end up with the function that would be helpful by itself, and can be used to alias 64-bit LE bitmap_{from,to}_arr32, like bitmap_copy_safe() does. So I preferred to leave things as is. The following patch switches kernel to new API and introduces test for it. Discussion is here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/15/592 [ynorov@caviumnetworks.com: rename bitmap_copy_safe to bitmap_copy_clear_tail] Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180201172508.5739-3-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171228150019.27953-1-ynorov@caviumnetworks.com Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <ynorov@caviumnetworks.com> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> Cc: David Decotigny <decot@googlers.com>, Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> Cc: Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@microsoft.com> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2018-02-06 15:38:02 -08:00