From: Gang Li <gang.li@linux.dev>
To: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Gang Li <gang.li@linux.dev>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Gang Li <ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] hugetlb: parallelize 2M hugetlb allocation and initialization
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 10:12:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <829fb129-f643-4960-a2da-cd38e5ee8f39@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <849D7EA4-BCF4-4587-8A78-F3B35B63EAE9@linux.dev>
On 2024/1/22 19:30, Muchun Song wrote:
>> On Jan 22, 2024, at 18:12, Gang Li <gang.li@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> On 2024/1/22 15:10, Muchun Song wrote:> On 2024/1/18 20:39, Gang Li wrote:
>>>> +static void __init hugetlb_alloc_node(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, void *arg)
>>>> {
>>>> - unsigned long i;
>>>> + struct hstate *h = (struct hstate *)arg;
>>>> + int i, num = end - start;
>>>> + nodemask_t node_alloc_noretry;
>>>> + unsigned long flags;
>>>> + int next_node = 0;
>>> This should be first_online_node which may be not zero.
>>
>> That's right. Thanks!
>>
>>>> - for (i = 0; i < h->max_huge_pages; ++i) {
>>>> - if (!alloc_bootmem_huge_page(h, NUMA_NO_NODE))
>>>> + /* Bit mask controlling how hard we retry per-node allocations.*/
>>>> + nodes_clear(node_alloc_noretry);
>>>> +
>>>> + for (i = 0; i < num; ++i) {
>>>> + struct folio *folio = alloc_pool_huge_folio(h, &node_states[N_MEMORY],
>>>> + &node_alloc_noretry, &next_node);
>>>> + if (!folio)
>>>> break;
>>>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
>>>> I suspect there will more contention on this lock when parallelizing.
>>
>> In the worst case, there are only 'numa node number' of threads in
>> contention. And in my testing, it doesn't degrade performance, but
>> rather improves performance due to the reduced granularity.
>
> So, the performance does not change if you move the lock out of
> loop?
>
If we move the lock out of loop, then multi-threading becomes
single-threading, which definitely reduces performance.
```
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
for (i = 0; i < num; ++i) {
struct folio *folio = alloc_pool_huge_folio(h,
&node_states[N_MEMORY],
&node_alloc_noretry,
&next_node);
if (!folio)
break;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
__prep_account_new_huge_page(h, folio_nid(folio));
enqueue_hugetlb_folio(h, folio);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
cond_resched();
}
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&hugetlb_lock, flags);
}
```
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-23 2:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-18 12:39 [RESEND PATCH v4 0/7] hugetlb: parallelize hugetlb page init on boot Gang Li
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] hugetlb: code clean for hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages Gang Li
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] hugetlb: split hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages Gang Li
2024-01-22 3:43 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] padata: dispatch works on different nodes Gang Li
2024-01-18 23:04 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-19 15:05 ` Gang Li
2024-01-19 2:59 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-19 15:04 ` Gang Li
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] hugetlb: pass *next_nid_to_alloc directly to for_each_node_mask_to_alloc Gang Li
2024-01-18 23:01 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-19 2:54 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-22 6:16 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-22 9:14 ` Gang Li
2024-01-22 9:50 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] hugetlb: have CONFIG_HUGETLBFS select CONFIG_PADATA Gang Li
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] hugetlb: parallelize 2M hugetlb allocation and initialization Gang Li
2024-01-22 7:10 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-22 10:12 ` Gang Li
2024-01-22 11:30 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-23 2:12 ` Gang Li [this message]
2024-01-23 3:32 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-18 12:39 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] hugetlb: parallelize 1G hugetlb initialization Gang Li
2024-01-18 14:22 ` Kefeng Wang
2024-01-19 14:45 ` Gang Li
2024-01-24 9:23 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-24 10:52 ` Gang Li
2024-01-25 2:48 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-25 3:47 ` Gang Li
2024-01-25 3:56 ` Gang Li
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=829fb129-f643-4960-a2da-cd38e5ee8f39@linux.dev \
--to=gang.li@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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.