From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
To: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Cc: Nathan Lynch <nathanl@linux.ibm.com>,
Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] powerpc/pseries: Consolidate different NUMA distance update code paths
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 12:37:46 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zgueu8ql.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YPjMkQ5W1fSQdzNe@yekko>
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 28, 2021 at 08:41:15PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>> The associativity details of the newly added resourced are collected from
>> the hypervisor via "ibm,configure-connector" rtas call. Update the numa
>> distance details of the newly added numa node after the above call.
>>
>> Instead of updating NUMA distance every time we lookup a node id
>> from the associativity property, add helpers that can be used
>> during boot which does this only once. Also remove the distance
>> update from node id lookup helpers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 173 +++++++++++++-----
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c | 2 +
>> .../platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c | 2 +
>> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries.h | 1 +
>> 4 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> index 0ec16999beef..7b142f79d600 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
>> @@ -208,22 +208,6 @@ int __node_distance(int a, int b)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__node_distance);
>>
>> -static void initialize_distance_lookup_table(int nid,
>> - const __be32 *associativity)
>> -{
>> - int i;
>> -
>> - if (affinity_form != FORM1_AFFINITY)
>> - return;
>> -
>> - for (i = 0; i < max_associativity_domain_index; i++) {
>> - const __be32 *entry;
>> -
>> - entry = &associativity[be32_to_cpu(distance_ref_points[i]) - 1];
>> - distance_lookup_table[nid][i] = of_read_number(entry, 1);
>> - }
>> -}
>> -
>> /*
>> * Returns nid in the range [0..nr_node_ids], or -1 if no useful NUMA
>> * info is found.
>> @@ -241,15 +225,6 @@ static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity)
>> /* POWER4 LPAR uses 0xffff as invalid node */
>> if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= nr_node_ids)
>> nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>> -
>> - if (nid > 0 &&
>> - of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= max_associativity_domain_index) {
>> - /*
>> - * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array
>> - */
>> - initialize_distance_lookup_table(nid, associativity + 1);
>> - }
>> -
>> out:
>> return nid;
>> }
>> @@ -287,6 +262,49 @@ int of_node_to_nid(struct device_node *device)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(of_node_to_nid);
>>
>> +static void __initialize_form1_numa_distance(const __be32 *associativity)
>> +{
>> + int i, nid;
>> +
>> + if (affinity_form != FORM1_AFFINITY)
>
> Since this shouldn't be called on a !form1 system, this could be a WARN_ON().
The way we call functions currently, instead of doing
if (affinity_form == FORM1_AFFINITY)
__initialize_form1_numa_distance()
We avoid doing the if check in multiple places. For example
parse_numa_properties will fetch the associativity array to find the
details of online node and set it online. We use the same code path to
initialize distance.
if (__vphn_get_associativity(i, vphn_assoc) == 0) {
nid = associativity_to_nid(vphn_assoc);
__initialize_form1_numa_distance(vphn_assoc);
} else {
cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
BUG_ON(!cpu);
associativity = of_get_associativity(cpu);
if (associativity) {
nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
__initialize_form1_numa_distance(associativity);
}
We avoid the the if (affinity_form == FORM1_AFFINITY) check there by
moving the check inside __initialize_form1_numa_distance().
>
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= primary_domain_index) {
>> + nid = of_read_number(&associativity[primary_domain_index], 1);
>
> This computes the nid from the assoc array independently of
> associativity_to_nid, which doesn't seem like a good idea. Wouldn't
> it be better to call assocaitivity_to_nid(), then make the next bit
> conditional on nid !== NUMA_NO_NODE?
@@ -302,9 +302,8 @@ static void __initialize_form1_numa_distance(const __be32 *associativity)
if (affinity_form != FORM1_AFFINITY)
return;
- if (of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= primary_domain_index) {
- nid = of_read_number(&associativity[primary_domain_index], 1);
-
+ nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
+ if (nid != NUMA_NO_NODE) {
for (i = 0; i < distance_ref_points_depth; i++) {
const __be32 *entry;
>
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < max_associativity_domain_index; i++) {
>> + const __be32 *entry;
>> +
>> + entry = &associativity[be32_to_cpu(distance_ref_points[i])];
>> + distance_lookup_table[nid][i] = of_read_number(entry, 1);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void initialize_form1_numa_distance(struct device_node *node)
>> +{
>> + const __be32 *associativity;
>> +
>> + associativity = of_get_associativity(node);
>> + if (!associativity)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + __initialize_form1_numa_distance(associativity);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * Used to update distance information w.r.t newly added node.
>> + */
>> +void update_numa_distance(struct device_node *node)
>> +{
>> + if (affinity_form == FORM0_AFFINITY)
>> + return;
>> + else if (affinity_form == FORM1_AFFINITY) {
>> + initialize_form1_numa_distance(node);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> static int __init find_primary_domain_index(void)
>> {
>> int index;
>> @@ -433,6 +451,48 @@ static int of_get_assoc_arrays(struct assoc_arrays *aa)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +static int get_nid_and_numa_distance(struct drmem_lmb *lmb)
>> +{
>> + struct assoc_arrays aa = { .arrays = NULL };
>> + int default_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>> + int nid = default_nid;
>> + int rc, index;
>> +
>> + if ((primary_domain_index < 0) || !numa_enabled)
>
> Under what circumstances could you get primary_domain_index < 0?
IIUC that is to handle failure to parse device tree.
ea9f5b702fe0215188fba2eda117419e4ae90a67
>
>> + return default_nid;
>> +
>> + rc = of_get_assoc_arrays(&aa);
>> + if (rc)
>> + return default_nid;
>> +
>> + if (primary_domain_index <= aa.array_sz &&
>> + !(lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_AI_INVALID) && lmb->aa_index < aa.n_arrays) {
>> + index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz + primary_domain_index - 1;
>
> Does anywhere verify that primary_domain_index <= aa.array_sz?
That is the first part of the check?
>
>> + nid = of_read_number(&aa.arrays[index], 1);
>> +
>> + if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= nr_node_ids)
>> + nid = default_nid;
>> + if (nid > 0 && affinity_form == FORM1_AFFINITY) {
>> + int i;
>> + const __be32 *associativity;
>> +
>> + index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz;
>> + associativity = &aa.arrays[index];
>> + /*
>> + * lookup array associativity entries have different format
>> + * There is no length of the array as the first element.
>
> The difference it very small, and this is not a hot path. Couldn't
> you reduce a chunk of code by prepending aa.array_sz, then re-using
> __initialize_form1_numa_distance. Or even making
> __initialize_form1_numa_distance() take the length as a parameter.
The changes are small but confusing w.r.t how we look at the
associativity-lookup-arrays. The way we interpret associativity array
and associativity lookup array using primary_domain_index is different.
Hence the '-1' in the node lookup here.
index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz + primary_domain_index - 1;
nid = of_read_number(&aa.arrays[index], 1);
>
>> + */
>> + for (i = 0; i < max_associativity_domain_index; i++) {
>> + const __be32 *entry;
>> +
>> + entry = &associativity[be32_to_cpu(distance_ref_points[i]) - 1];
>
> Does anywhere verify that distance_ref_points[i] <= aa.array_size for
> every i?
We do check for
if (primary_domain_index <= aa.array_sz &&
>
>> + distance_lookup_table[nid][i] = of_read_number(entry, 1);
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return nid;
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * This is like of_node_to_nid_single() for memory represented in the
>> * ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory node.
>> @@ -458,21 +518,14 @@ int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct drmem_lmb *lmb)
>>
>> if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= nr_node_ids)
>> nid = default_nid;
>> -
>> - if (nid > 0) {
>> - index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz;
>> - initialize_distance_lookup_table(nid,
>> - &aa.arrays[index]);
>> - }
>> }
>> -
>> return nid;
>> }
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR
>> -static int vphn_get_nid(long lcpu)
>> +
>> +static int __vphn_get_associativity(long lcpu, __be32 *associativity)
>> {
>> - __be32 associativity[VPHN_ASSOC_BUFSIZE] = {0};
>> long rc, hwid;
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -492,10 +545,22 @@ static int vphn_get_nid(long lcpu)
>>
>> rc = hcall_vphn(hwid, VPHN_FLAG_VCPU, associativity);
>> if (rc == H_SUCCESS)
>> - return associativity_to_nid(associativity);
>> + return 0;
>> }
>>
>> + return -1;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int vphn_get_nid(long lcpu)
>> +{
>> + __be32 associativity[VPHN_ASSOC_BUFSIZE] = {0};
>> +
>> +
>> + if (!__vphn_get_associativity(lcpu, associativity))
>> + return associativity_to_nid(associativity);
>> +
>> return NUMA_NO_NODE;
>> +
>> }
>> #else
>> static int vphn_get_nid(long unused)
>> @@ -692,7 +757,7 @@ static int __init numa_setup_drmem_lmb(struct drmem_lmb *lmb,
>> size = read_n_cells(n_mem_size_cells, usm);
>> }
>>
>> - nid = of_drconf_to_nid_single(lmb);
>> + nid = get_nid_and_numa_distance(lmb);
>> fake_numa_create_new_node(((base + size) >> PAGE_SHIFT),
>> &nid);
>> node_set_online(nid);
>> @@ -709,6 +774,7 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
>> struct device_node *memory;
>> int default_nid = 0;
>> unsigned long i;
>> + const __be32 *associativity;
>>
>> if (numa_enabled == 0) {
>> printk(KERN_WARNING "NUMA disabled by user\n");
>> @@ -734,18 +800,30 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
>> * each node to be onlined must have NODE_DATA etc backing it.
>> */
>> for_each_present_cpu(i) {
>> + __be32 vphn_assoc[VPHN_ASSOC_BUFSIZE];
>> struct device_node *cpu;
>> - int nid = vphn_get_nid(i);
>> + int nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>>
>> - /*
>> - * Don't fall back to default_nid yet -- we will plug
>> - * cpus into nodes once the memory scan has discovered
>> - * the topology.
>> - */
>> - if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
>> + memset(vphn_assoc, 0, VPHN_ASSOC_BUFSIZE * sizeof(__be32));
>
> What's the memset() for? AFAICT you only look at vphn_assoc in the
> branch where __vphn_get_associativity() succeeds.
That was done to match the existing code. We do use a zero filled array
when making that hcall in this code path. I don't see us doing that
everywhere. But didn't want to change that behaviour in this patch.
-static int vphn_get_nid(long lcpu)
+
+static int __vphn_get_associativity(long lcpu, __be32 *associativity)
{
- __be32 associativity[VPHN_ASSOC_BUFSIZE] = {0};
long rc, hwid;
>
>> +
>> + if (__vphn_get_associativity(i, vphn_assoc) == 0) {
>> + nid = associativity_to_nid(vphn_assoc);
>> + __initialize_form1_numa_distance(vphn_assoc);
>> + } else {
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Don't fall back to default_nid yet -- we will plug
>> + * cpus into nodes once the memory scan has discovered
>> + * the topology.
>> + */
>> cpu = of_get_cpu_node(i, NULL);
>> BUG_ON(!cpu);
>> - nid = of_node_to_nid_single(cpu);
>> +
>> + associativity = of_get_associativity(cpu);
>> + if (associativity) {
>> + nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
>> + __initialize_form1_numa_distance(associativity);
>> + }
>> of_node_put(cpu);
>> }
>>
>> @@ -781,8 +859,11 @@ static int __init parse_numa_properties(void)
>> * have associativity properties. If none, then
>> * everything goes to default_nid.
>> */
>> - nid = of_node_to_nid_single(memory);
>> - if (nid < 0)
>> + associativity = of_get_associativity(memory);
>> + if (associativity) {
>> + nid = associativity_to_nid(associativity);
>> + __initialize_form1_numa_distance(associativity);
>> + } else
>> nid = default_nid;
>>
>> fake_numa_create_new_node(((start + size) >> PAGE_SHIFT), &nid);
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> index 7e970f81d8ff..778b6ab35f0d 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-cpu.c
>> @@ -498,6 +498,8 @@ static ssize_t dlpar_cpu_add(u32 drc_index)
>> return saved_rc;
>> }
>>
>> + update_numa_distance(dn);
>> +
>> rc = dlpar_online_cpu(dn);
>> if (rc) {
>> saved_rc = rc;
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c
>> index 36f66556a7c6..40d350f31a34 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c
>> @@ -180,6 +180,8 @@ static int update_lmb_associativity_index(struct drmem_lmb *lmb)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>>
>> + update_numa_distance(lmb_node);
>> +
>> dr_node = of_find_node_by_path("/ibm,dynamic-reconfiguration-memory");
>> if (!dr_node) {
>> dlpar_free_cc_nodes(lmb_node);
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries.h b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries.h
>> index 1f051a786fb3..663a0859cf13 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries.h
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/pseries.h
>> @@ -113,4 +113,5 @@ extern u32 pseries_security_flavor;
>> void pseries_setup_security_mitigations(void);
>> void pseries_lpar_read_hblkrm_characteristics(void);
>>
>> +void update_numa_distance(struct device_node *node);
>> #endif /* _PSERIES_PSERIES_H */
>
> --
> David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
> david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
> | _way_ _around_!
> http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-22 7:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-28 15:11 [PATCH v5 0/6] Add support for FORM2 associativity Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 1/6] powerpc/pseries: rename min_common_depth to primary_domain_index Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-22 1:59 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 2:36 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 5:17 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-26 2:28 ` David Gibson
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 2/6] powerpc/pseries: rename distance_ref_points_depth to max_associativity_domain_index Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-22 0:59 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 1:19 ` David Gibson
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 3/6] powerpc/pseries: Rename TYPE1_AFFINITY to FORM1_AFFINITY Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 4/6] powerpc/pseries: Consolidate different NUMA distance update code paths Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-06-28 20:21 ` kernel test robot
2021-06-28 20:40 ` kernel test robot
2021-07-22 1:40 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 7:07 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V [this message]
2021-07-26 2:37 ` David Gibson
2021-07-27 3:32 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-27 5:59 ` David Gibson
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 5/6] powerpc/pseries: Add a helper for form1 cpu distance Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-22 1:42 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 7:09 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-26 2:38 ` David Gibson
2021-06-28 15:11 ` [PATCH v5 6/6] powerpc/pseries: Add support for FORM2 associativity Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-22 2:28 ` David Gibson
2021-07-22 7:34 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2021-07-26 2:41 ` David Gibson
2021-07-13 14:27 ` [PATCH v5 0/6] " Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-07-13 14:30 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
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=87zgueu8ql.fsf@linux.ibm.com \
--to=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=danielhb413@gmail.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=nathanl@linux.ibm.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).