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: NPaul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> Signed-off-by: NDavid 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: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Showing
想要评论请 注册 或 登录