linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@austin.ibm.com>
To: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Dave Hansen <dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:17:33 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA2313D.2030508@austin.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100928123848.GH14068@sgi.com>

On 09/28/2010 07:38 AM, Robin Holt wrote:
> I was tasked with looking at a slowdown in similar sized SGI machines
> booting x86_64.  Jack Steiner had already looked into the memory_dev_init.
> I was looking at link_mem_sections().
> 
> I made a dramatic improvement on a 16TB machine in that function by
> merely caching the most recent memory section and checking to see if
> the next memory section happens to be the subsequent in the linked list
> of kobjects.
> 
> That simple cache reduced the time for link_mem_sections from 1 hour 27
> minutes down to 46 seconds.

Nice!

> 
> I would like to propose we implement something along those lines also,
> but I am currently swamped.  I can probably get you a patch tomorrow
> afternoon that applies at the end of this set.

Should this be done as a separate patch?  This patch set concentrates on
updates to the memory code with the node updates only being done due to the
memory changes.

I think its a good idea to do the caching and have no problem adding on to
this patchset if no one else has any objections.

-Nathan

> 
> Thanks,
> Robin
> 
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 02:09:31PM -0500, Nathan Fontenot wrote:
>> This set of patches decouples the concept that a single memory
>> section corresponds to a single directory in 
>> /sys/devices/system/memory/.  On systems
>> with large amounts of memory (1+ TB) there are perfomance issues
>> related to creating the large number of sysfs directories.  For
>> a powerpc machine with 1 TB of memory we are creating 63,000+
>> directories.  This is resulting in boot times of around 45-50
>> minutes for systems with 1 TB of memory and 8 hours for systems
>> with 2 TB of memory.  With this patch set applied I am now seeing
>> boot times of 5 minutes or less.
>>
>> The root of this issue is in sysfs directory creation. Every time
>> a directory is created a string compare is done against all sibling
>> directories to ensure we do not create duplicates.  The list of
>> directory nodes in sysfs is kept as an unsorted list which results
>> in this being an exponentially longer operation as the number of
>> directories are created.
>>
>> The solution solved by this patch set is to allow a single
>> directory in sysfs to span multiple memory sections.  This is
>> controlled by an optional architecturally defined function
>> memory_block_size_bytes().  The default definition of this
>> routine returns a memory block size equal to the memory section
>> size. This maintains the current layout of sysfs memory
>> directories as it appears to userspace to remain the same as it
>> is today.
>>
>> For architectures that define their own version of this routine,
>> as is done for powerpc in this patchset, the view in userspace
>> would change such that each memoryXXX directory would span
>> multiple memory sections.  The number of sections spanned would
>> depend on the value reported by memory_block_size_bytes.
>>
>> In both cases a new file 'end_phys_index' is created in each
>> memoryXXX directory.  This file will contain the physical id
>> of the last memory section covered by the sysfs directory.  For
>> the default case, the value in 'end_phys_index' will be the same
>> as in the existing 'phys_index' file.
>>
>> This version of the patch set includes an update to to properly
>> report block_size_bytes, phys_index, and end_phys_index.  Additionally,
>> the patch that adds the end_phys_index sysfs file is now patch 5/8
>> instead of being patch 2/8 as in the previous version of the patches.
>>
>> -Nathan Fontenot
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-28 18:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-27 19:09 [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:21 ` [PATCH 1/8] v2 Move find_memory_block() routine Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:22 ` [PATCH 2/8] v2 Add section count to memory_block struct Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28  9:31   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:14     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:23 ` [PATCH 3/8] v2 Add mutex for adding/removing memory blocks Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:25 ` [PATCH 4/8] v2 Allow memory block to span multiple memory sections Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 23:55   ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-28 18:06     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:48   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:20     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:26 ` [PATCH 5/8] v2 Add end_phys_index file Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:27 ` [PATCH 6/8] v2 Update node sysfs code Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28  9:29   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 15:21     ` Dave Hansen
2010-09-27 19:28 ` [PATCH 7/8] v2 Define memory_block_size_bytes() for powerpc/pseries Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-27 19:28 ` [PATCH 8/8] v2 Update memory hotplug documentation Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:45   ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 18:18     ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-28 12:38 ` [PATCH 0/8] v2 De-Couple sysfs memory directories from memory sections Robin Holt
2010-09-28 18:17   ` Nathan Fontenot [this message]
2010-09-29 19:28     ` Robin Holt
2010-09-30 15:17       ` Nathan Fontenot
2010-09-30 16:39       ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 12:44 ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 15:12   ` Robin Holt
2010-09-28 16:34     ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29  2:50     ` Greg KH
2010-09-29  8:32       ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-29 12:37         ` Greg KH
2010-09-29 13:39           ` Kay Sievers
2010-10-03  7:52           ` Avi Kivity
2010-09-28 15:17   ` Dave Hansen

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=4CA2313D.2030508@austin.ibm.com \
    --to=nfont@austin.ibm.com \
    --cc=dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.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).