linux-sh.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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.

  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).