All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:17:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA4AA21.9030109@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100929192830.GK14068@sgi.com>

On 09/29/2010 02:28 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:17:33PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
>> On 09/28/2010 07:38 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> I was tasked with looking at a slowdown in similar sized SGI machines
>>> booting x86_64.  Jack Steiner had already looked into the memory_dev_init.
>>> I was looking at link_mem_sections().
>>>
>>> I made a dramatic improvement on a 16TB machine in that function by
>>> merely caching the most recent memory section and checking to see if
>>> the next memory section happens to be the subsequent in the linked list
>>> of kobjects.
>>>
>>> That simple cache reduced the time for link_mem_sections from 1 hour 27
>>> minutes down to 46 seconds.
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>>>
>>> I would like to propose we implement something along those lines also,
>>> but I am currently swamped.  I can probably get you a patch tomorrow
>>> afternoon that applies at the end of this set.
>>
>> Should this be done as a separate patch?  This patch set concentrates on
>> updates to the memory code with the node updates only being done due to the
>> memory changes.
>>
>> I think its a good idea to do the caching and have no problem adding on to
>> this patchset if no one else has any objections.
> 
> I am sorry.  I had meant to include you on the Cc: list.  I just posted a
> set of patches (3 small patches) which implement the cache most recent bit
> I aluded to above.  Search for a subject of "Speed up link_mem_sections
> during boot" and you will find them.  I did add you to the Cc: list for
> the next time I end up sending the set.
> 
> My next task is to implement a x86_64 SGI UV specific chunk of code
> to memory_block_size_bytes().  Would you consider adding that to your
> patch set?  I expect to have that either later today or early tomorrow.
> 

No problem. I'm putting together a new patch set with updates from all of
the comments now so go ahead and send it to me when you have it ready.

-Nathan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:17:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA4AA21.9030109@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100929192830.GK14068@sgi.com>

On 09/29/2010 02:28 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:17:33PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
>> On 09/28/2010 07:38 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> I was tasked with looking at a slowdown in similar sized SGI machines
>>> booting x86_64.  Jack Steiner had already looked into the memory_dev_init.
>>> I was looking at link_mem_sections().
>>>
>>> I made a dramatic improvement on a 16TB machine in that function by
>>> merely caching the most recent memory section and checking to see if
>>> the next memory section happens to be the subsequent in the linked list
>>> of kobjects.
>>>
>>> That simple cache reduced the time for link_mem_sections from 1 hour 27
>>> minutes down to 46 seconds.
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>>>
>>> I would like to propose we implement something along those lines also,
>>> but I am currently swamped.  I can probably get you a patch tomorrow
>>> afternoon that applies at the end of this set.
>>
>> Should this be done as a separate patch?  This patch set concentrates on
>> updates to the memory code with the node updates only being done due to the
>> memory changes.
>>
>> I think its a good idea to do the caching and have no problem adding on to
>> this patchset if no one else has any objections.
> 
> I am sorry.  I had meant to include you on the Cc: list.  I just posted a
> set of patches (3 small patches) which implement the cache most recent bit
> I aluded to above.  Search for a subject of "Speed up link_mem_sections
> during boot" and you will find them.  I did add you to the Cc: list for
> the next time I end up sending the set.
> 
> My next task is to implement a x86_64 SGI UV specific chunk of code
> to memory_block_size_bytes().  Would you consider adding that to your
> patch set?  I expect to have that either later today or early tomorrow.
> 

No problem. I'm putting together a new patch set with updates from all of
the comments now so go ahead and send it to me when you have it ready.

-Nathan

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 10:17:53 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA4AA21.9030109@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100929192830.GK14068@sgi.com>

On 09/29/2010 02:28 PM, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 01:17:33PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
>> On 09/28/2010 07:38 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
>>> I was tasked with looking at a slowdown in similar sized SGI machines
>>> booting x86_64.  Jack Steiner had already looked into the memory_dev_init.
>>> I was looking at link_mem_sections().
>>>
>>> I made a dramatic improvement on a 16TB machine in that function by
>>> merely caching the most recent memory section and checking to see if
>>> the next memory section happens to be the subsequent in the linked list
>>> of kobjects.
>>>
>>> That simple cache reduced the time for link_mem_sections from 1 hour 27
>>> minutes down to 46 seconds.
>>
>> Nice!
>>
>>>
>>> I would like to propose we implement something along those lines also,
>>> but I am currently swamped.  I can probably get you a patch tomorrow
>>> afternoon that applies at the end of this set.
>>
>> Should this be done as a separate patch?  This patch set concentrates on
>> updates to the memory code with the node updates only being done due to the
>> memory changes.
>>
>> I think its a good idea to do the caching and have no problem adding on to
>> this patchset if no one else has any objections.
> 
> I am sorry.  I had meant to include you on the Cc: list.  I just posted a
> set of patches (3 small patches) which implement the cache most recent bit
> I aluded to above.  Search for a subject of "Speed up link_mem_sections
> during boot" and you will find them.  I did add you to the Cc: list for
> the next time I end up sending the set.
> 
> My next task is to implement a x86_64 SGI UV specific chunk of code
> to memory_block_size_bytes().  Would you consider adding that to your
> patch set?  I expect to have that either later today or early tomorrow.
> 

No problem. I'm putting together a new patch set with updates from all of
the comments now so go ahead and send it to me when you have it ready.

-Nathan

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-30 15:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-27 19:09 [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:09 ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:09 ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:21 ` [PATCH 1/8] v2 Move find_memory_block() routine Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:21   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:21   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:22 ` [PATCH 2/8] v2 Add section count to memory_block struct Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:22   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:22   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28  9:31   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28  9:31     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28  9:31     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:14     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:14       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:14       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:23 ` [PATCH 3/8] v2 Add mutex for adding/removing memory blocks Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:23   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:23   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:25 ` [PATCH 4/8] v2 Allow memory block to span multiple memory sections Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:25   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:25   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 23:55   ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-27 23:55     ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-27 23:55     ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 18:06     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:06       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:06       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:48   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:48     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:48     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:20     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:20       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:20       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:26 ` [PATCH 5/8] v2 Add end_phys_index file Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:26   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:26   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:27 ` [PATCH 6/8] v2 Update node sysfs code Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:27   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:27   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28  9:29   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28  9:29     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28  9:29     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 15:21     ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 15:21       ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 15:21       ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-27 19:28 ` [PATCH 7/8] v2 Define memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28 ` [PATCH 8/8] v2 Update memory hotplug documentation Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:45   ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 12:45     ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 12:45     ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 18:18     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:18       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:18       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:38 ` [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:38   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:38   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:17   ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:17     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 18:17     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-29 19:28     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-29 19:28       ` Robin Holt
2010-09-29 19:28       ` Robin Holt
2010-09-30 15:17       ` Nathan Fontenot [this message]
2010-09-30 15:17         ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-30 15:17         ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-30 16:39       ` Robin Holt
2010-09-30 16:39         ` Robin Holt
2010-09-30 16:39         ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:44 ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 12:44   ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 12:44   ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 15:12   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 15:12     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 15:12     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 16:34     ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 16:34       ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 16:34       ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29  2:50     ` Greg KH
2010-09-29  2:50       ` Greg KH
2010-09-29  2:50       ` Greg KH
2010-09-29  8:32       ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29  8:32         ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29  8:32         ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29 12:37         ` Greg KH
2010-09-29 12:37           ` Greg KH
2010-09-29 12:37           ` Greg KH
2010-09-29 13:39           ` Kay Sievers
2010-09-29 13:39             ` Kay Sievers
2010-09-29 13:39             ` Kay Sievers
2010-10-03  7:52           ` Avi Kivity
2010-10-03  7:52             ` Avi Kivity
2010-10-03  7:52             ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 15:17   ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 15:17     ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 15:17     ` Dave Hansen

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=4CA4AA21.9030109@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=nfont@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    /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.