| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <871r1bu310.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 22:24:43 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, osalvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
Hasan Al Maruf <hasanalmaruf@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V10 RESEND 0/6] NUMA balancing: optimize memory
placement for memory tiering system
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 08:06:40PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
>> > On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 03:19:06PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> >> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> writes:
>> >> > On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:27:51AM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
>
>> >> >> After commit c221c0b0308f ("device-dax: "Hotplug" persistent memory
>> >> >> for use like normal RAM"), the PMEM could be used as the
>> >> >> cost-effective volatile memory in separate NUMA nodes. In a typical
>> >> >> memory tiering system, there are CPUs, DRAM and PMEM in each physical
>> >> >> NUMA node. The CPUs and the DRAM will be put in one logical node,
>> >> >> while the PMEM will be put in another (faked) logical node.
>> >> >
>> >> > So what does a system like that actually look like, SLIT table wise, and
>> >> > how does that affect init_numa_topology_type() ?
>> >>
>> >> The SLIT table is as follows,
>
> <snip>
>
>> >> node distances:
>> >> node 0 1 2 3
>> >> 0: 10 21 17 28
>> >> 1: 21 10 28 17
>> >> 2: 17 28 10 28
>> >> 3: 28 17 28 10
>> >>
>> >> init_numa_topology_type() set sched_numa_topology_type to NUMA_DIRECT.
>> >>
>> >> The node 0 and node 1 are onlined during boot. While the PMEM node,
>> >> that is, node 2 and node 3 are onlined later. As in the following dmesg
>> >> snippet.
>> >
>> > But how? sched_init_numa() scans the *whole* SLIT table to determine
>> > nr_levels / sched_domains_numa_levels, even offline nodes. Therefore it
>> > should find 4 distinct distance values and end up not selecting
>> > NUMA_DIRECT.
>> >
>> > Similarly for the other types it uses for_each_online_node(), which
>> > would include the pmem nodes once they've been onlined, but I'm thinking
>> > we explicitly want to skip CPU-less nodes in that iteration.
>>
>> I used the debug patch as below, and get the log in dmesg as follows,
>>
>> [ 5.394577][ T1] sched_numa_topology_type: 0, levels: 4, max_distance: 28
>>
>> I found that I forget another caller of init_numa_topology_type() run
>> during hotplug. I will add another printk() to show it. Sorry about
>> that.
>
> Can you try with this on?
>
> I'm suspecting there's a problem with init_numa_topology_type(); it will
> never find the max distance due to the _online_ clause in the iteration,
> since you said the pmem nodes are not online yet.
>
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index d201a7052a29..53ab9c63c185 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> @@ -1756,6 +1756,8 @@ static void init_numa_topology_type(void)
> return;
> }
> }
> +
> + WARN(1, "no NUMA type determined");
> }
Hi, Peter,
I have run the test, the warning is triggered in the dmesg as follows.
I will continue to debug hotplug tomorrow.
[ 5.400923][ T1] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[ 5.401917][ T1] no NUMA type determined
[ 5.401921][ T1] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at kernel/sched/topology.c:1760 init_numa_topology_type+0x199/0x1c0
[ 5.403918][ T1] Modules linked in:
[ 5.404917][ T1] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.16.0-rc8-00053-gbe30433a13c0 #1
[ 5.405917][ T1] Hardware name: Intel Corporation S2600WFD/S2600WFD, BIOS SE5C620.86B.0D.01.0286.011120190816 01/11/2019
[ 5.406917][ T1] RIP: 0010:init_numa_topology_type+0x199/0x1c0
[ 5.407917][ T1] Code: de 82 41 89 dc e8 07 4f 4e 00 3d 00 04 00 00 44 0f 4e e0 3d ff 03 00 00 0f 8e ca fe ff ff 48 c7 c7 a7 88 55 82 e8 0c e5 b3 00 <0f> 0b e9 74 ff ff ff 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 66 66 2e 0f
[ 5.408917][ T1] RSP: 0000:ffffc900000b7e00 EFLAGS: 00010286
[ 5.409917][ T1] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000400 RCX: c0000000ffff7fff
[ 5.410917][ T1] RDX: ffffc900000b7c28 RSI: 00000000ffff7fff RDI: 0000000000000000
[ 5.411917][ T1] RBP: 000000000000001c R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffc900000b7c20
[ 5.412917][ T1] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000001 R12: 0000000000000400
[ 5.413917][ T1] R13: 0000000000000400 R14: 0000000000000400 R15: 000000000000000c
[ 5.414917][ T1] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff88903f600000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
[ 5.415917][ T1] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[ 5.416917][ T1] CR2: ffff88df7fc01000 CR3: 0000005f7ec0a001 CR4: 00000000007706f0
[ 5.417917][ T1] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
[ 5.418917][ T1] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
[ 5.419917][ T1] PKRU: 55555554
[ 5.420917][ T1] Call Trace:
[ 5.421919][ T1] <TASK>
[ 5.422919][ T1] sched_init_numa+0x4a7/0x5c0
[ 5.423918][ T1] sched_init_smp+0x18/0x79
[ 5.424918][ T1] kernel_init_freeable+0x136/0x276
[ 5.425918][ T1] ? rest_init+0x100/0x100
[ 5.426917][ T1] kernel_init+0x16/0x140
[ 5.427917][ T1] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
[ 5.428918][ T1] </TASK>
[ 5.429919][ T1] ---[ end trace aa5563c4363f1ba3 ]---
[ 5.430917][ T1] sched_numa_topology_type: 0, levels: 4, max_distance: 28
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Powered by blists - more mailing lists