linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@skynet.ie>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	rientjes@google.com, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com,
	clameter@sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 09:25:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071009162526.GC26472@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071009154052.GC12632@skynet.ie>

On 09.10.2007 [16:40:53 +0100], Mel Gorman wrote:
> First, sorry for being so slow to respond. I was getting ill towards the end
> of last week and am worse now. Brain is in total mush as a result. Thanks
> Lee for finding this problem and thanks to Nish for investigating it properly.
> 
> Comments and candidate fix to one zonelist are below.
> 
> On (08/10/07 18:11), Nishanth Aravamudan didst pronounce:
> > On 28.09.2007 [15:25:27 +0100], Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > 
> > > Two zonelists exist so that GFP_THISNODE allocations will be guaranteed
> > > to use memory only from a node local to the CPU. As we can now filter the
> > > zonelist based on a nodemask, we filter the standard node zonelist for zones
> > > on the local node when GFP_THISNODE is specified.
> > > 
> > > When GFP_THISNODE is used, a temporary nodemask is created with only the
> > > node local to the CPU set. This allows us to eliminate the second zonelist.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> > > Acked-by: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > diff -rup -X /usr/src/patchset-0.6/bin//dontdiff linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm2-030_filter_nodemask/include/linux/gfp.h linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm2-040_use_one_zonelist/include/linux/gfp.h
> > > --- linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm2-030_filter_nodemask/include/linux/gfp.h	2007-09-28 15:49:57.000000000 +0100
> > > +++ linux-2.6.23-rc8-mm2-040_use_one_zonelist/include/linux/gfp.h	2007-09-28 15:55:03.000000000 +0100
> > 
> > [Reordering the chunks to make my comments a little more logical]
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > > -static inline struct zonelist *node_zonelist(int nid, gfp_t flags)
> > > +static inline struct zonelist *node_zonelist(int nid)
> > >  {
> > > -	return NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zonelists + gfp_zonelist(flags);
> > > +	return &NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zonelist;
> > >  }
> > > 
> > >  #ifndef HAVE_ARCH_FREE_PAGE
> > > @@ -198,7 +186,7 @@ static inline struct page *alloc_pages_n
> > >  	if (nid < 0)
> > >  		nid = numa_node_id();
> > > 
> > > -	return __alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, node_zonelist(nid, gfp_mask));
> > > +	return __alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, node_zonelist(nid));
> > >  }
> > 
> > This is alloc_pages_node(), and converting the nid to a zonelist means
> > that lower levels (specifically __alloc_pages() here) are not aware of
> > nids, as far as I can tell.
> 
> Yep, this is correct.
> 
> > This isn't a change, I just want to make
> > sure I understand...
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > >  struct page * fastcall
> > >  __alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp_mask, unsigned int order,
> > >  		struct zonelist *zonelist)
> > >  {
> > > +	/*
> > > +	 * Use a temporary nodemask for __GFP_THISNODE allocations. If the
> > > +	 * cost of allocating on the stack or the stack usage becomes
> > > +	 * noticable, allocate the nodemasks per node at boot or compile time
> > > +	 */
> > > +	if (unlikely(gfp_mask & __GFP_THISNODE)) {
> > > +		nodemask_t nodemask;
> > > +
> > > +		return __alloc_pages_internal(gfp_mask, order,
> > > +				zonelist, nodemask_thisnode(&nodemask));
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > >  	return __alloc_pages_internal(gfp_mask, order, zonelist, NULL);
> > >  }
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > So alloc_pages_node() calls here and for THISNODE allocations, we go ask
> > nodemask_thisnode() for a nodemask...
> > 
> 
> Also correct.
> 
> > > +static nodemask_t *nodemask_thisnode(nodemask_t *nodemask)
> > > +{
> > > +	/* Build a nodemask for just this node */
> > > +	int nid = numa_node_id();
> > > +
> > > +	nodes_clear(*nodemask);
> > > +	node_set(nid, *nodemask);
> > > +
> > > +	return nodemask;
> > > +}
> > 
> > <snip>
> > 
> > And nodemask_thisnode() always gives us a nodemask with only the node
> > the current process is running on set, I think?
> > 
> 
> Yes, I interpreted THISNODE to mean "this node I am running on".
> Callers seemed to expect this but the memoryless needs it to be "this
> node I am running on unless I specify a node in which case I mean that
> node.".

I think that is only true (THISNODE = local node) if the callpath is not
via alloc_pages_node(). If the callpath is via alloc_pages_node(), then
it depends on whether the nid parameter is -1 (in which case it is also
local node) or anything (in which case it is the nid specified). Ah,
reading further along, that's exactly what your changelog indicates too
:)

> > That seems really wrong -- and would explain what Lee was seeing while
> > using my patches for the hugetlb pool allocator to use THISNODE
> > allocations. All the allocations would end up coming from whatever node
> > the process happened to be running on. This obviously messes up hugetlb
> > accounting, as I rely on THISNODE requests returning NULL if they go
> > off-node.
> > 
> > I'm not sure how this would be fixed, as __alloc_pages() no longer has
> > the nid to set in the mask.
> > 
> > Am I wrong in my analysis?
> > 
> 
> No, you seem to be right on the ball. Can you review the following patch
> please and determine if it fixes the problem in a satisfactory manner? I
> think it does and your tests seemed to give proper values with this patch
> applied but brain no worky work and a second opinion is needed.
> 
> ====
> Subject: Use specified node ID with GFP_THISNODE if available
> 
> It had been assumed that __GFP_THISNODE meant allocating from the local
> node and only the local node. However, users of alloc_pages_node() may also
> specify GFP_THISNODE. In this case, only the specified node should be used.
> This patch will allocate pages only from the requested node when GFP_THISNODE
> is used with alloc_pages_node().

I will throw this into my tests and see if it fixes things. It looks
like it should.

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center

--
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:[~2007-10-09 16:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-28 14:23 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v8 Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 14:23 ` [PATCH 1/6] Use zonelists instead of zones when direct reclaiming pages Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 14:24 ` [PATCH 2/6] Introduce node_zonelist() for accessing the zonelist for a GFP mask Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 14:24 ` [PATCH 3/6] Use two zonelist that are filtered by " Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 14:24 ` [PATCH 4/6] Have zonelist contains structs with both a zone pointer and zone_idx Mel Gorman
2007-10-17  3:22   ` David Rientjes
2007-09-28 14:25 ` [PATCH 5/6] Filter based on a nodemask as well as a gfp_mask Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 15:37   ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-28 18:28     ` Mel Gorman
2007-09-28 18:38       ` Paul Jackson
2007-09-28 21:03       ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-09-28 14:25 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman
2007-10-09  1:11   ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-10-09  1:56     ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-09  3:17       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-10-09 15:40     ` Mel Gorman
2007-10-09 16:25       ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2007-10-09 18:47         ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-09 18:12       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-10-10 15:53       ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-10-10 16:05         ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-10-10 16:09         ` Mel Gorman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-11-09 14:32 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v9 Mel Gorman
2007-11-09 14:34 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman
2007-11-09 15:45   ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-09 16:14     ` Mel Gorman
2007-11-09 16:19       ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-09 16:45       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-11-09 17:18         ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-11-09 17:26           ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-09 18:16             ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-11-09 18:20               ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-11-09 18:22                 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-11 14:16             ` Mel Gorman
2007-11-12 19:07               ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-09 18:14           ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2007-11-20 14:19     ` Mel Gorman
2007-11-20 15:14       ` Lee Schermerhorn
2007-11-20 16:21         ` Mel Gorman
2007-11-20 20:19           ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-20 20:18       ` Christoph Lameter
2007-11-20 21:26         ` Mel Gorman
2007-11-20 21:33         ` Andrew Morton
2007-11-20 21:38           ` Christoph Lameter
2007-09-13 17:52 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v7 Mel Gorman
2007-09-13 17:54 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman
2007-09-12 21:04 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v6 Mel Gorman
2007-09-12 21:06 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 21:30 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v5 (resend) Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 21:32 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 15:19 [PATCH 0/6] Use one zonelist per node instead of multiple zonelists v5 Mel Gorman
2007-09-11 15:21 ` [PATCH 6/6] Use one zonelist that is filtered by nodemask Mel Gorman

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=20071009162526.GC26472@us.ibm.com \
    --to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=clameter@sgi.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mel@skynet.ie \
    --cc=rientjes@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).