[RFC PATCH 4/4] powerpc: reorder per-cpu NUMA information's initialization
From: Nishanth Aravamudan <hidden>
Date: 2014-08-14 00:17:34
Also in:
linuxppc-dev
Subsystem:
linux for powerpc (32-bit and 64-bit), the rest · Maintainers:
Madhavan Srinivasan, Michael Ellerman, Linus Torvalds
There is an issue currently where NUMA information is used on powerpc
(and possibly ia64) before it has been read from the device-tree, which
leads to large slab consumption with CONFIG_SLUB and memoryless nodes.
NUMA powerpc non-boot CPU's cpu_to_node/cpu_to_mem is only accurate
after start_secondary(), similar to ia64, which is invoked via
smp_init().
Commit 6ee0578b4daae ("workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as
early_initcall()") made init_workqueues() be invoked via
do_pre_smp_initcalls(), which is obviously before the secondary
processors are online.
Additionally, the following commits changed init_workqueues() to use
cpu_to_node to determine the node to use for kthread_create_on_node:
bce903809ab3f ("workqueue: add wq_numa_tbl_len and
wq_numa_possible_cpumask[]")
f3f90ad469342 ("workqueue: determine NUMA node of workers accourding to
the allowed cpumask")
Therefore, when init_workqueues() runs, it sees all CPUs as being on
Node 0. On LPARs or KVM guests where Node 0 is memoryless, this leads to
a high number of slab deactivations
(http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg67489.html).
While testing memoryless nodes on PowerKVM guests with a fix to the
workqueue logic to use cpu_to_mem() instead of cpu_to_node(), with a
guest topology:
available: 2 nodes (0-1)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 2
node 0 size: 0 MB
node 0 free: 0 MB
node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70
node 1 size: 16336 MB
node 1 free: 15329 MB
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 40
1: 40 10
the slab consumption decreases from:
Slab: 932416 kB
SUnreclaim: 902336 kB
to
Slab: 395264 kB
SUnreclaim: 359424 kB
And we see a corresponding increase in the slab efficiency from:
slab mem objs slabs
used active active
------------------------------------------------------------
kmalloc-16384 337 MB 11.28% 100.00%
task_struct 288 MB 9.93% 100.00%
to:
slab mem objs slabs
used active active
------------------------------------------------------------
kmalloc-16384 37 MB 100.00% 100.00%
task_struct 31 MB 100.00% 100.00%
Powerpc didn't support memoryless nodes until recently (64bb80d87f01
"powerpc/numa: Enable CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES" and 8c272261194d
"powerpc/numa: Enable USE_PERCPU_NUMA_NODE_ID"). Those commits also
helped improve memory consumption with these kind of environments.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <redacted>
---
Ben & others, one area I'm still unsure of is if calling the NUMA
callback for all CPUs is desired. I don't know how else to get the NUMA
topology into the array easily, but I didn't test in an environment with
hotpluggable CPUs, so I'm not sure if it will lead to errors there (are
there device-tree entries for the topology of CPUs that will be plugged
in? I assume not, actually, so maybe we should keep the logic in
start_secondary so that those CPUs that are hotplugged later get the
right topology data?
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
index 1007fb802e6b..1fc8984f272e 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c@@ -376,6 +376,12 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); zalloc_cpumask_var_node(&per_cpu(cpu_core_map, cpu), GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); + /* + * numa_node_id() works after this. + */ + set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu]); + set_cpu_numa_mem(cpu, + local_memory_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu])); } cpumask_set_cpu(boot_cpuid, cpu_sibling_mask(boot_cpuid));
@@ -723,12 +729,6 @@ void start_secondary(void *unused) } traverse_core_siblings(cpu, true); - /* - * numa_node_id() works after this. - */ - set_numa_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu]); - set_numa_mem(local_memory_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu])); - smp_wmb(); notify_cpu_starting(cpu); set_cpu_online(cpu, true);
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
index d3e9a78eaed3..32341e16b8ce 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c@@ -1049,7 +1049,7 @@ static void __init mark_reserved_regions_for_nid(int nid) void __init do_init_bootmem(void) { - int nid; + int nid, cpu; min_low_pfn = 0; max_low_pfn = memblock_end_of_DRAM() >> PAGE_SHIFT;
@@ -1122,8 +1122,15 @@ void __init do_init_bootmem(void) reset_numa_cpu_lookup_table(); register_cpu_notifier(&ppc64_numa_nb); - cpu_numa_callback(&ppc64_numa_nb, CPU_UP_PREPARE, - (void *)(unsigned long)boot_cpuid); + /* + * We need the numa_cpu_lookup_table to be accurate for all + * CPUs, even before we online them, so that we can use + * cpu_to_{node,mem} early in boot, cf. smp_prepare_cpus(). + */ + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { + cpu_numa_callback(&ppc64_numa_nb, CPU_UP_PREPARE, + (void *)(unsigned long)boot_cpuid); + } } void __init paging_init(void) --
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>