All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: speedup in __early_pfn_to_nid
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:55:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130321105516.GC18484@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130318155619.GA18828@sgi.com>


* Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com> wrote:

> When booting on a large memory system, the kernel spends
> considerable time in memmap_init_zone() setting up memory zones.
> Analysis shows significant time spent in __early_pfn_to_nid().
> 
> The routine memmap_init_zone() checks each PFN to verify the
> nid is valid.  __early_pfn_to_nid() sequentially scans the list of
> pfn ranges to find the right range and returns the nid.  This does
> not scale well.  On a 4 TB (single rack) system there are 308
> memory ranges to scan.  The higher the PFN the more time spent
> sequentially spinning through memory ranges.
> 
> Since memmap_init_zone() increments pfn, it will almost always be
> looking for the same range as the previous pfn, so check that
> range first.  If it is in the same range, return that nid.
> If not, scan the list as before.
> 
> A 4 TB (single rack) UV1 system takes 512 seconds to get through
> the zone code.  This performance optimization reduces the time
> by 189 seconds, a 36% improvement.
> 
> A 2 TB (single rack) UV2 system goes from 212.7 seconds to 99.8 seconds,
> a 112.9 second (53%) reduction.

Nice speedup!

A minor nit, in addition to Andrew's suggestion about wrapping 
__early_pfn_to_nid():

> Index: linux/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/mm/page_alloc.c	2013-03-18 10:52:11.510988843 -0500
> +++ linux/mm/page_alloc.c	2013-03-18 10:52:14.214931348 -0500
> @@ -4161,10 +4161,19 @@ int __meminit __early_pfn_to_nid(unsigne
>  {
>  	unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
>  	int i, nid;
> +	static unsigned long last_start_pfn, last_end_pfn;
> +	static int last_nid;

Please move these globals out of function local scope, to make it more 
apparent that they are not on-stack. I only noticed it in the second pass.

Thanks,

	Ingo

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: speedup in __early_pfn_to_nid
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 11:55:16 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130321105516.GC18484@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130318155619.GA18828@sgi.com>


* Russ Anderson <rja@sgi.com> wrote:

> When booting on a large memory system, the kernel spends
> considerable time in memmap_init_zone() setting up memory zones.
> Analysis shows significant time spent in __early_pfn_to_nid().
> 
> The routine memmap_init_zone() checks each PFN to verify the
> nid is valid.  __early_pfn_to_nid() sequentially scans the list of
> pfn ranges to find the right range and returns the nid.  This does
> not scale well.  On a 4 TB (single rack) system there are 308
> memory ranges to scan.  The higher the PFN the more time spent
> sequentially spinning through memory ranges.
> 
> Since memmap_init_zone() increments pfn, it will almost always be
> looking for the same range as the previous pfn, so check that
> range first.  If it is in the same range, return that nid.
> If not, scan the list as before.
> 
> A 4 TB (single rack) UV1 system takes 512 seconds to get through
> the zone code.  This performance optimization reduces the time
> by 189 seconds, a 36% improvement.
> 
> A 2 TB (single rack) UV2 system goes from 212.7 seconds to 99.8 seconds,
> a 112.9 second (53%) reduction.

Nice speedup!

A minor nit, in addition to Andrew's suggestion about wrapping 
__early_pfn_to_nid():

> Index: linux/mm/page_alloc.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/mm/page_alloc.c	2013-03-18 10:52:11.510988843 -0500
> +++ linux/mm/page_alloc.c	2013-03-18 10:52:14.214931348 -0500
> @@ -4161,10 +4161,19 @@ int __meminit __early_pfn_to_nid(unsigne
>  {
>  	unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
>  	int i, nid;
> +	static unsigned long last_start_pfn, last_end_pfn;
> +	static int last_nid;

Please move these globals out of function local scope, to make it more 
apparent that they are not on-stack. I only noticed it in the second pass.

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-03-21 10:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-18 15:56 [patch] mm: speedup in __early_pfn_to_nid Russ Anderson
2013-03-18 15:56 ` Russ Anderson
2013-03-19  3:56 ` David Rientjes
2013-03-19  3:56   ` David Rientjes
2013-03-20 22:32 ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-20 22:32   ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-20 22:32   ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-21 10:55 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2013-03-21 10:55   ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-21 12:35   ` Michal Hocko
2013-03-21 12:35     ` Michal Hocko
2013-03-21 18:03     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-21 18:03       ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-25 21:26       ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-25 21:26         ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-26  8:05         ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-26  8:05           ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-21 18:40   ` David Rientjes
2013-03-21 18:40     ` David Rientjes
2013-03-22  7:25     ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-22  7:25       ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-23 15:29       ` Russ Anderson
2013-03-23 15:29         ` Russ Anderson
2013-03-23 20:37         ` Yinghai Lu
2013-03-25  2:11           ` Lin Feng
2013-03-25  2:11             ` Lin Feng
2013-03-25 21:56             ` Russ Anderson
2013-03-25 21:56               ` Russ Anderson
2013-03-25 22:17               ` Yinghai Lu
2013-03-23 22:24         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-03-23 22:24           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2013-03-25  0:28           ` David Rientjes
2013-03-25  0:28             ` David Rientjes
2013-03-25 21:34             ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-25 21:34               ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-25 22:36               ` David Rientjes
2013-03-25 22:36                 ` David Rientjes
2013-03-25 22:42                 ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-25 22:42                   ` Andrew Morton
2013-03-24  7:43         ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-24  7:43           ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130321105516.GC18484@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rja@sgi.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.