lists.openwall.net  lists / announce owlusers owldev johnusers johndev passwdqcusers yescrypt popa3dusers / osssecurity kernelhardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / cryptdev xvendor / Bugtraq FullDisclosure linuxkernel linuxnetdev linuxext4 linuxhardening PHC  
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 

Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 11:15:41 +0100 From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@....com> To: LKML <linuxkernel@...r.kernel.org> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com> Subject: [RFC] sched/topology: NUMA topology limitations (For those of you who already got this one: sorry! I messed up LKML and Vincent's addresses) Hi, Some of you may have noticed me struggling to plug some topology holes in [1]. While digging in there I realized there are some nonobvious limitations wrt supported NUMA topologies; IMO if we don't feel like they should be "fixed", they should at the very least be documented somewhere. I should get to ramble about this at this year's (v)LPC during the scheduler µconf, but this isn't really trivial so I figured an email wouldn't hurt. I tried to package it into reasonable segments  this is still a pretty big wall of text, so use of coffee/tea/beer is recommended. Spoiler alert: I don't have solutions for these yet. Diameter issue ============== Definition ++++++++++ Each unique NUMA distance gets an index in sched_domains_numa_distance[], and as the big wall of text atop topology.c::build_balance_mask() mentions this can be seen as an array of hops. i.e. in the following table: 0 1 0: 10 20 1: 20 10 sched_domains_numa_distance = { 10, 20 }; distance 10 is 0 hops (i.e. identity distance), distance 20 is 1 hop. This isn't strictly speaking always true, as e.g. two consecutive distance values could represent the same number of hops (with one path slightly "longer" than the other), but it makes explaining that mess a bit easier. I'm using 'diameter' in the NoC meaning of the term, i.e. the longest shortest path between any two nodes, in # of hops. Diameter <= 2 +++++++++++++ AFAIU, one of the issues I'm encountering in [1] is that the scheduler topology code cannot cope with a NUMA diameter > 2. I've looked into what's already out there, but haven't found any (x86) machine that violates this rule. Below are some examples. AMD Epyc  node 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0: 10 16 16 16 32 32 32 32 1: 16 10 16 16 32 32 32 32 2: 16 16 10 16 32 32 32 32 3: 16 16 16 10 32 32 32 32 4: 32 32 32 32 10 16 16 16 5: 32 32 32 32 16 10 16 16 6: 32 32 32 32 16 16 10 16 7: 32 32 32 32 16 16 16 10 Here, diameter=2 Opteron 6174  This is the 4node one, which looks like this: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 20 20 20 1: 20 10 20 20 2: 20 20 10 20 3: 20 20 20 10 0  3  \ /   X   / \  1  2 Clearly this is diameter=1 AMD Bulldozer  I'm using the topology described in decade of wasted cores [2]; I'm not going to bother reproducing the distance table, the topology looks like: _______________________ / _____________ \  / \ 0  4  5  1  \ /  \ /  \ /   X  X  X   / \  / \  / \  6  2  3  7  \______________/ \_______________________/ Which is diameter=2 (assuming equal edge weights) Diameter > 2 ++++++++++++ I haven't found other NUMA systems out there with a diameter > 2 other than the one I'm rambling about in [1]. Nevertheless, I think there are some theoretical setups that aren't too insane (at least less than [1]). One of them is a 6node mesh, which is diameter=3 and would look like: 0  5   1  4   2  3 A more convoluted one would be a 12node "spidergon"; it's a ring with an even number of nodes N, each node is connected to both of its neighbours and there is an interlink between node X and node (X + N/2) % N. I won't pretend I can draw it in ASCII, but that again gives us a diameter of 3. Case study w/ QEMU ++++++++++++++++++ Setup  The topology I'll describe below is a simplified version of the one in [1], as it is the smallest reproducer of the issue. Morten has been calling this a "segmented bus". 1  0    2  3 node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 20 30 40 1: 20 10 20 30 2: 30 20 10 20 3: 40 30 20 10 Diameter here is 3. I can recreate this with the following qemu incantation: $ qemusystemaarch64 kernel Image initrd rootfs.cpio append \ 'console=ttyAMA0 earlycon=pl011,0x9000000 root=/dev/vda debug earlyprintk=serial sched_debug' \ smp cores=4 nographic m 512 cpu cortexa53 machine virt \ numa node,cpus=0,nodeid=0 numa node,cpus=1,nodeid=1, \ numa node,cpus=2,nodeid=2, numa node,cpus=3,nodeid=3, \ numa dist,src=0,dst=1,val=20, numa dist,src=0,dst=2,val=30, \ numa dist,src=0,dst=3,val=40, numa dist,src=1,dst=2,val=20, \ numa dist,src=1,dst=3,val=30, numa dist,src=2,dst=3,val=20 If you boot the above with CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG, you'll get: [ 0.245896] CPU0 attaching scheddomain(s): [ 0.246133] domain0: span=01 level=NUMA [ 0.246592] groups: 0:{ span=0 cap=1011 }, 1:{ span=1 cap=1008 } [ 0.246998] domain1: span=02 level=NUMA [ 0.247145] groups: 0:{ span=01 mask=0 cap=2019 }, 2:{ span=13 mask=2 cap=3025 } [ 0.247454] ERROR: groups don't span domain>span [ 0.247654] domain2: span=03 level=NUMA [ 0.247892] groups: 0:{ span=02 mask=0 cap=3021 }, 3:{ span=13 mask=3 cap=3047 } [ 0.248915] CPU1 attaching scheddomain(s): [ 0.249050] domain0: span=02 level=NUMA [ 0.249181] groups: 1:{ span=1 cap=1008 }, 2:{ span=2 cap=1002 }, 0:{ span=0 cap=1011 } [ 0.249661] domain1: span=03 level=NUMA [ 0.249810] groups: 1:{ span=02 mask=1 cap=3034 }, 3:{ span=23 mask=3 cap=2023 } [ 0.250381] CPU2 attaching scheddomain(s): [ 0.250565] domain0: span=13 level=NUMA [ 0.250710] groups: 2:{ span=2 cap=1002 }, 3:{ span=3 cap=999 }, 1:{ span=1 cap=1008 } [ 0.250992] domain1: span=03 level=NUMA [ 0.251129] groups: 2:{ span=13 mask=2 cap=3025 }, 0:{ span=01 mask=0 cap=2019 } [ 0.251474] CPU3 attaching scheddomain(s): [ 0.251606] domain0: span=23 level=NUMA [ 0.251772] groups: 3:{ span=3 cap=999 }, 2:{ span=2 cap=1002 } [ 0.252439] domain1: span=13 level=NUMA [ 0.252587] groups: 3:{ span=23 mask=3 cap=2023 }, 1:{ span=02 mask=1 cap=3034 } [ 0.252859] ERROR: groups don't span domain>span [ 0.253009] domain2: span=03 level=NUMA [ 0.253153] groups: 3:{ span=13 mask=3 cap=3047 }, 0:{ span=02 mask=0 cap=3021 } Why we get this  The sched_domains we get here are NUMA<=20, NUMA<=30, NUMA<=40. There's no problem with the sched_domain spans, those are directly derived from sched_domains_numa_masks[][] and that works just fine. We then build the sched_groups using those spans, see build_overlap_sched_groups() Let's have a look at what happens for the first domain on CPU0 (node0) and CPU2 (node2). This would be NUMA<=20 (i.e. 1 hop), whose groups are the spanned CPUs: CPU0 (node0) NUMA<=20 span=[01], groups=(0), (1) CPU2 (node2) NUMA<=20 span=[13], groups=(2), (3), (1) So far so good, nothing outlandish here. However, when we get to building NUMA<=30 (i.e. 2 hops), this falls apart: CPU0 NUMA<=30 span=[02], groups=(01), (13) <<< sched_domain_span(CPU2, NUMA<=20) ^^^ sched_domain_span(CPU0, NUMA<=20) CPU3 (node3) is very much *not* <= 30 distance (2 hops) away from CPU0 (node0), but we have a group that spans it anyway, because of the aforementioned code. IOW, we are creating a completely bogus transitivity relation that sort of looks like: For any nodes i, j, k, and hop count x > 1: node_distance(i, j) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[x] AND node_distance(j, k) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[x1] IMPLIES node_distance(i, k) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[x] Which becomes in our example: node_distance(0, 2) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[2] # 30 AND node_distance(2, 3) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[1] # 20 IMPLIES (bogusly!) node_distance(0, 3) <= sched_domains_numa_distance[2] # 30 This actually works for diameters == 2 (given everything is covered by 2 hops anyway) but falls apart for bigger diameters, as is the case here. Implications of fixing this  Clearly the current sched_group setup for such topologies is not what we want: this disturbs load balancing on the 'corrupted' domains. If we *do* want to support systems like this, then we have other problems to solve. Currently, on the aforementioned QEMU setup, we have: CPU0domain1 group0: span=02, mask=0 group2: span=13, mask=2 CPU1domain1 group1: span=02, mask=1 group3: span=23, mask=3 CPU2domain1 group2: span=13, mask=2 group0: span=01, mask=0 CPU3domain1 group3: span=23, mask=3 group1: span=02, mask=1 We would want to "fix" this into: CPU0domain1 group0: span=02, mask=0  group2: span=13, mask=2 + group?: span=12, mask=?? CPU1domain1 group1: span=02, mask=1 group3: span=23, mask=3 CPU2domain1 group2: span=13, mask=2 group0: span=01, mask=0 CPU3domain1 group3: span=23, mask=3  group1: span=02, mask=1 + group?: span=12, mask=?? I've purposedly left a blank for the balance mask, because there isn't really any valid choice. No CPU will have this (12) group as its local group at domain1 (NUMA<=30); worse than that, we actually have now 5 unique groups at this topology level despite having only 4 CPUs: there are no CPUs left to use as identifier of that "new" group (i.e. owner of sched_group_capacity). Even if we find some form of unique identifier for that group, it still isn't the local group of any CPU at any topology level. Since update_group_capacity() only updates the capacity of the local group, we don't have any way to update the capacity of such groups  unless we start updating more than the local group, which will get ugly real quick. That's as far as I got to. If you got to here, thank you for your time, and as always, comments / feedback are most welcome. Links ===== [1]: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200324125533.174471valentin.schneider@arm.com/ [2]: https://www.ece.ubc.ca/~sasha/papers/eurosys16final29.pdf Thanks, Valentin
Powered by blists  more mailing lists