From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
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: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 17:46:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c4180f8b-a41f-4dd7-9a2b-f4ec0efa0dcf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZpqHniqaMxj-iDfw@kernel.org>
On 19.07.24 17:34, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 19, 2024 at 05:07:35PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> - * 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.
>>
>> But won't their arch code try setting the nodes online at a later stage?
>>
>> And I think, some architectures only set nodes online conditionally
>> (see most other node_set_online() calls).
>>
>> Sorry if I'm confused here, but with now unconditional node_set_online(), won't
>> we change the behavior of other architectures?
>
> The generic alloc_node_data() does not set the node online:
>
> +/* Allocate NODE_DATA for a node on the local memory */
> +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. */
> + nd_pa = memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(nd_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, nid);
> + if (!nd_pa)
> + panic("Cannot allocate %zu bytes for node %d data\n",
> + nd_size, nid);
> + nd = __va(nd_pa);
> +
> + /* report and initialize */
> + pr_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)
> + pr_info(" NODE_DATA(%d) on node %d\n", nid, tnid);
> +
> + node_data[nid] = nd;
> + memset(NODE_DATA(nid), 0, sizeof(pg_data_t));
> +}
>
> I might have missed some architecture except x86 that calls
> node_set_online() in its alloc_node_data(), but the intention was to leave
> that call outside the alloc and explicitly add it after the call to
> alloc_node_data() if needed like in x86.
I'm stupid, I didn't realize it is still only called from x86 :(
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-19 15:47 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
2024-07-19 15:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-07-19 15:34 ` Mike Rapoport
2024-07-19 15:46 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
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=c4180f8b-a41f-4dd7-9a2b-f4ec0efa0dcf@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--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=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=rppt@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).