linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] NUMA balancing: fix NUMA topology type for memory tiering system

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 28 Jan 2022 15:30:50 +0800
From:   "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:     Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] NUMA balancing: fix NUMA topology type for
 memory tiering system

Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> * Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com> [2022-01-28 10:38:41]:
>
>> 
>> One possible fix is to ignore CPU-less nodes when detecting NUMA
>> topology type in init_numa_topology_type().  That works well for the
>> example system.  Is it good in general for any system with CPU-less
>> nodes?
>> 
>
> A CPUless node at the time online doesn't necessarily mean a CPUless node
> for the entire boot. For example: On PowerVM Lpars, aka powerpc systems,
> some of the nodes may start as CPUless nodes and then CPUS may get
> populated/hotplugged on them.

Got it!

> Hence I am not sure if adding a check for CPUless nodes at node online may
> work for such systems.

How about something as below?

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

-----------------------8<-----------------------------

diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
index d201a7052a29..733e8bd930b4 100644
--- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
@@ -1737,7 +1737,13 @@ static void init_numa_topology_type(void)
 	}
 
 	for_each_online_node(a) {
+		if (!node_state(a, N_CPU))
+			continue;
+
 		for_each_online_node(b) {
+			if (!node_state(b, N_CPU))
+				continue;
+
 			/* Find two nodes furthest removed from each other. */
 			if (node_distance(a, b) < n)
 				continue;
@@ -1849,6 +1855,13 @@ void sched_init_numa(void)
 
 			sched_domains_numa_masks[i][j] = mask;
 
+			/*
+			 * The mask will be initialized when the first CPU of
+			 * the node is onlined.
+			 */
+			if (!node_state(j, N_CPU))
+				continue;
+
 			for_each_node(k) {
 				/*
 				 * Distance information can be unreliable for
@@ -1919,8 +1932,10 @@ void sched_init_numa(void)
 		return;
 
 	bitmap_zero(sched_numa_onlined_nodes, nr_node_ids);
-	for_each_online_node(i)
-		bitmap_set(sched_numa_onlined_nodes, i, 1);
+	for_each_online_node(i) {
+		if (node_state(i, N_CPU))
+			bitmap_set(sched_numa_onlined_nodes, i, 1);
+	}
 }
 
 static void __sched_domains_numa_masks_set(unsigned int node)
@@ -1928,7 +1943,7 @@ static void __sched_domains_numa_masks_set(unsigned int node)
 	int i, j;
 
 	/*
-	 * NUMA masks are not built for offline nodes in sched_init_numa().
+	 * NUMA masks are not built for offline/CPU-less nodes in sched_init_numa().
 	 * Thus, when a CPU of a never-onlined-before node gets plugged in,
 	 * adding that new CPU to the right NUMA masks is not sufficient: the
 	 * masks of that CPU's node must also be updated.