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 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).