From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@huawei.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org,
nvdimm@lists.linux.dev, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/17] arch, mm: pull out allocation of NODE_DATA to generic code
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 10:02:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zpi-HAb7EBxrZBtK@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <220da8ed-337a-4b1e-badf-2bff1d36e6c3@redhat.com>
On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 04:42:48PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 16.07.24 13:13, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: "Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)" <rppt@kernel.org>
> >
> > Architectures that support NUMA duplicate the code that allocates
> > NODE_DATA on the node-local memory with slight variations in reporting
> > of the addresses where the memory was allocated.
> >
> > Use x86 version as the basis for the generic alloc_node_data() function
> > and call this function in architecture specific numa initialization.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
> > ---
>
> [...]
>
> > diff --git a/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c b/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c
> > index 9208eaadf690..909f6cec3a26 100644
> > --- a/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c
> > +++ b/arch/mips/loongson64/numa.c
> > @@ -81,12 +81,8 @@ static void __init init_topology_matrix(void)
> > static void __init node_mem_init(unsigned int node)
> > {
> > - struct pglist_data *nd;
> > unsigned long node_addrspace_offset;
> > unsigned long start_pfn, end_pfn;
> > - unsigned long nd_pa;
> > - int tnid;
> > - const size_t nd_size = roundup(sizeof(pg_data_t), SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>
> One interesting change is that we now always round up to full pages on
> architectures where we previously rounded up to SMP_CACHE_BYTES.
On my workstation struct pglist_data take 174400, cachelines: 2725, members: 43 */
> I assume we don't really expect a significant growth in memory consumption
> that we care about, especially because most systems with many nodes also
> have quite some memory around.
With Debian kernel configuration for 6.5 struct pglist data takes 174400
bytes so the increase here is below 1%.
For NUMA systems with a lot of nodes that shouldn't be a problem.
> > -/* Allocate NODE_DATA for a node on the local memory */
> > -static void __init alloc_node_data(int nid)
> > -{
> > - const size_t nd_size = roundup(sizeof(pg_data_t), PAGE_SIZE);
> > - u64 nd_pa;
> > - void *nd;
> > - int tnid;
> > -
> > - /*
> > - * Allocate node data. Try node-local memory and then any node.
> > - * Never allocate in DMA zone.
> > - */
> > - nd_pa = memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
> > - if (!nd_pa) {
> > - pr_err("Cannot find %zu bytes in any node (initial node: %d)\n",
> > - nd_size, nid);
> > - return;
> > - }
> > - nd = __va(nd_pa);
> > -
> > - /* report and initialize */
> > - printk(KERN_INFO "NODE_DATA(%d) allocated [mem %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n", nid,
> > - nd_pa, nd_pa + nd_size - 1);
> > - tnid = early_pfn_to_nid(nd_pa >> PAGE_SHIFT);
> > - if (tnid != nid)
> > - printk(KERN_INFO " NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
> > -
> > - node_data[nid] = nd;
> > - memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
> > -
> > - node_set_online(nid);
> > -}
> > -
> > /**
> > * numa_cleanup_meminfo - Cleanup a numa_meminfo
> > * @mi: numa_meminfo to clean up
> > @@ -571,6 +538,7 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
> > continue;
> > alloc_node_data(nid);
> > + node_set_online(nid);
> > }
>
> I can spot that we only remove a single node_set_online() call from x86.
>
> What about all the other architectures? Will there be any change in behavior
> for them? Or do we simply set the nodes online later once more?
On x86 node_set_online() was a part of alloc_node_data() and I moved it
outside so it's called right after alloc_node_data(). On other
architectures the allocation didn't include that call, so there should be
no difference there.
> --
> Cheers,
>
> David / dhildenb
>
>
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-18 7:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-16 11:13 [PATCH 00/17] mm: introduce numa_memblks Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 01/17] mm: move kernel/numa.c to mm/ Mike Rapoport
2024-07-17 14:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 13:55 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 02/17] MIPS: sgi-ip27: make NODE_DATA() the same as on all other architectures Mike Rapoport
2024-07-17 14:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 14:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 7:34 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 03/17] MIPS: loongson64: rename __node_data to node_data Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 13:07 ` Jiaxun Yang
2024-07-17 14:33 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 15:27 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 04/17] arch, mm: move definition of node_data to generic code Mike Rapoport
2024-07-17 14:35 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 15:39 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-23 0:15 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 05/17] arch, mm: pull out allocation of NODE_DATA " Mike Rapoport
2024-07-17 14:42 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-18 7:02 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2024-07-19 15:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 15:34 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 15:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 15:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-19 16:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-20 10:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:11 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 06/17] x86/numa: simplify numa_distance allocation Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:28 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 7:51 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 07/17] x86/numa: move FAKE_NODE_* defines to numa_emu Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:30 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 08/17] x86/numa_emu: simplify allocation of phys_dist Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:38 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 09/17] x86/numa_emu: split __apicid_to_node update to a helper function Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:47 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 10/17] x86/numa_emu: use a helper function to get MAX_DMA32_PFN Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 11/17] x86/numa: numa_{add,remove}_cpu: make cpu parameter unsigned Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:57 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 12/17] mm: introduce numa_memblks Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 18:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 8:03 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 13/17] mm: move numa_distance and related code from x86 to numa_memblks Mike Rapoport
2024-07-18 21:46 ` Samuel Holland
2024-07-19 5:55 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 17:48 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-20 12:25 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 14/17] mm: introduce numa_emulation Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 16:03 ` Zi Yan
2024-07-20 12:09 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 15/17] mm: make numa_memblks more self-contained Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 18:07 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-20 12:32 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-22 8:05 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 16/17] arch_numa: switch over to numa_memblks Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 18:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-16 11:13 ` [PATCH 17/17] mm: make range-to-target_node lookup facility a part of numa_memblks Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 18:19 ` Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-19 13:33 ` [PATCH 00/17] mm: introduce numa_memblks Jonathan Cameron
2024-07-22 8:08 ` Mike Rapoport
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=Zpi-HAb7EBxrZBtK@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com \
--cc=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=nvdimm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=robh@kernel.org \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 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).