From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90D44274B2E for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 12:00:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763294416; cv=none; b=jv6mjn23owp3HMo5CEn606ws7WLvEjl+U68QN89qpQ4JHWEqs7cIvCcFQyX+gYAb+8iMxw7vw7FE2ILW76PXxhaZfnMpdF8JJfWYJ7uV+rhPMR+Qkc2Q4rGO8LxU80Kv3E2Z/ZZy8grWXVCHtlvAwF/IENPsLx9nEls3u90p9AI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1763294416; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UgifHQykeZ4ZMomR6gat/PeqqB4CWvAk/5DKHEuEwgQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EuOptOrlV1q5GDOF1KvJNIcb1WJtySxVyTqQWK6a0CZdNzHIYJrFxEBJPT+lw3URF+dmwDIo5ttxSvtDBc/R6glGprkejVZbQikqMmBwTDqnpMdufcBHUxPHTUc0R32iz8b3C/1RkIoMAG3dw9MHrGloa9munT/6M6AYjcQV6CU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=TmhFZddx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="TmhFZddx" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1763294413; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/S7mZMjOJf0NUeuKlTCB8fNClaQ105nEL4CD3u5Bc08=; b=TmhFZddx6N7jRsmMW2BqQpxlScq8tqsuej1sTtL77m6j++M9k6307Ibr+5jTkH0KJXjuaV DAiQSm6pxPylobgnKiieb5R/bbhwMeMSQJZdyqWtZ+SNAM/mNR99YKiwExpuOxDdpH9SsT hNM5s3oHNfVlX1fVfh19vMVrm60IUMU= Received: from mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-341-xoM1WJIKNp2vr8fOQjuANg-1; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 07:00:10 -0500 X-MC-Unique: xoM1WJIKNp2vr8fOQjuANg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: xoM1WJIKNp2vr8fOQjuANg_1763294408 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8586218AB400; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 12:00:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fedora (unknown [10.72.116.55]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E002319560A7; Sun, 16 Nov 2025 11:59:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2025 19:59:44 +0800 From: Ming Lei To: Caleb Sander Mateos Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, Uday Shankar , Stefani Seibold , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 01/27] kfifo: add kfifo_alloc_node() helper for NUMA awareness Message-ID: References: <20251112093808.2134129-1-ming.lei@redhat.com> <20251112093808.2134129-2-ming.lei@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 08:14:29PM -0800, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 1:38 AM Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Add __kfifo_alloc_node() by refactoring and reusing __kfifo_alloc(), > > and define kfifo_alloc_node() macro to support NUMA-aware memory > > allocation. > > > > The new __kfifo_alloc_node() function accepts a NUMA node parameter > > and uses kmalloc_array_node() instead of kmalloc_array() for > > node-specific allocation. The existing __kfifo_alloc() now calls > > __kfifo_alloc_node() with NUMA_NO_NODE to maintain backward > > compatibility. > > > > This enables users to allocate kfifo buffers on specific NUMA nodes, > > which is important for performance in NUMA systems where the kfifo > > will be primarily accessed by threads running on specific nodes. > > > > Cc: Stefani Seibold > > Cc: Andrew Morton > > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Signed-off-by: Ming Lei > > --- > > include/linux/kfifo.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > lib/kfifo.c | 13 ++++++++++--- > > 2 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/kfifo.h b/include/linux/kfifo.h > > index fd743d4c4b4b..61d1fe014a6c 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kfifo.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kfifo.h > > @@ -369,6 +369,30 @@ __kfifo_int_must_check_helper( \ > > }) \ > > ) > > > > +/** > > + * kfifo_alloc_node - dynamically allocates a new fifo buffer on a NUMA node > > + * @fifo: pointer to the fifo > > + * @size: the number of elements in the fifo, this must be a power of 2 > > + * @gfp_mask: get_free_pages mask, passed to kmalloc() > > + * @node: NUMA node to allocate memory on > > + * > > + * This macro dynamically allocates a new fifo buffer with NUMA node awareness. > > + * > > + * The number of elements will be rounded-up to a power of 2. > > + * The fifo will be release with kfifo_free(). > > + * Return 0 if no error, otherwise an error code. > > + */ > > +#define kfifo_alloc_node(fifo, size, gfp_mask, node) \ > > +__kfifo_int_must_check_helper( \ > > +({ \ > > + typeof((fifo) + 1) __tmp = (fifo); \ > > + struct __kfifo *__kfifo = &__tmp->kfifo; \ > > + __is_kfifo_ptr(__tmp) ? \ > > + __kfifo_alloc_node(__kfifo, size, sizeof(*__tmp->type), gfp_mask, node) : \ > > + -EINVAL; \ > > +}) \ > > +) > > + > > /** > > * kfifo_free - frees the fifo > > * @fifo: the fifo to be freed > > @@ -902,6 +926,9 @@ __kfifo_uint_must_check_helper( \ > > extern int __kfifo_alloc(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > size_t esize, gfp_t gfp_mask); > > > > +extern int __kfifo_alloc_node(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > + size_t esize, gfp_t gfp_mask, int node); > > + > > extern void __kfifo_free(struct __kfifo *fifo); > > > > extern int __kfifo_init(struct __kfifo *fifo, void *buffer, > > diff --git a/lib/kfifo.c b/lib/kfifo.c > > index a8b2eed90599..195cf0feecc2 100644 > > --- a/lib/kfifo.c > > +++ b/lib/kfifo.c > > @@ -22,8 +22,8 @@ static inline unsigned int kfifo_unused(struct __kfifo *fifo) > > return (fifo->mask + 1) - (fifo->in - fifo->out); > > } > > > > -int __kfifo_alloc(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > - size_t esize, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > +int __kfifo_alloc_node(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > + size_t esize, gfp_t gfp_mask, int node) > > { > > /* > > * round up to the next power of 2, since our 'let the indices > > @@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ int __kfifo_alloc(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > > > - fifo->data = kmalloc_array(esize, size, gfp_mask); > > + fifo->data = kmalloc_array_node(esize, size, gfp_mask, node); > > > > if (!fifo->data) { > > fifo->mask = 0; > > @@ -51,6 +51,13 @@ int __kfifo_alloc(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > > > return 0; > > } > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__kfifo_alloc_node); > > + > > +int __kfifo_alloc(struct __kfifo *fifo, unsigned int size, > > + size_t esize, gfp_t gfp_mask) > > +{ > > + return __kfifo_alloc_node(fifo, size, esize, gfp_mask, NUMA_NO_NODE); > > +} > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(__kfifo_alloc); > > Is it worth keeping __kfifo_alloc() as an extern function? Seems like > it would make the executable smaller to turn __kfifo_alloc() into a > static inline function that just defers to __kfifo_alloc_node(). OK, will convert to inline __kfifo_alloc() in next version. Thanks, Ming