[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <560665DB.7020301@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 17:31:07 +0800
From: Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>, <mika.j.penttila@...il.com>,
<mingo@...hat.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<rjw@...ysocki.net>, <hpa@...or.com>, <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
<isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>, <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
<izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com>, <gongzhaogang@...pur.com>,
<qiaonuohan@...fujitsu.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@...ck.org>, <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] x86, gfp: Cache best near node for memory allocation.
Hi, tj
On 09/11/2015 03:29 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:27:45PM +0800, Tang Chen wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
>> index ad35f30..1a1324f 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/gfp.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
>> @@ -307,13 +307,19 @@ static inline struct page *alloc_pages_node(int nid, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>> if (nid < 0)
>> nid = numa_node_id();
>>
>> + if (!node_online(nid))
>> + nid = get_near_online_node(nid);
>> +
>> return __alloc_pages(gfp_mask, order, node_zonelist(nid, gfp_mask));
>> }
> Why not just update node_data[]->node_zonelist in the first place?
zonelist will be rebuilt in __offline_pages() when the zone is not
populated any more.
Here, getting the best near online node is for those cpus on memory-less
nodes.
In the original code, if nid is NUMA_NO_NODE, the node the current cpu
resides in
will be chosen. And if the node is memory-less node, the cpu will be
mapped to its
best near online node.
But this patch-set will map the cpu to its original node, so
numa_node_id() may return
a memory-less node to allocator. And then memory allocation may fail.
> Also, what's the synchronization rule here? How are allocators
> synchronized against node hot [un]plugs?
The rule is: node_to_near_node_map[] array will be updated each time
node [un]hotplug happens.
Now it is not protected by a lock. But I think acquiring a lock may
cause performance regression
to memory allocator.
When rebuilding zonelist, stop_machine is used. So I think maybe
updating the
node_to_near_node_map[] array at the same time when zonelist is rebuilt
could be a good idea.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists