linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/8] sched/topology: add for_each_numa

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]
Message-ID: <ZDRP4KHfa9ptGe3X@yury-laptop>
Date:   Mon, 10 Apr 2023 11:05:20 -0700
From:   Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Pawel Chmielewski <pawel.chmielewski@...el.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
        Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
        Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] sched/topology: add for_each_numa_cpu() macro

On Sat, Mar 25, 2023 at 11:55:09AM -0700, Yury Norov wrote:
> for_each_cpu() is widely used in the kernel, and it's beneficial to
> create a NUMA-aware version of the macro.
> 
> Recently added for_each_numa_hop_mask() works, but switching existing
> codebase to it is not an easy process.
> 
> New for_each_numa_cpu() is designed to be similar to the for_each_cpu().
> It allows to convert existing code to NUMA-aware as simple as adding a
> hop iterator variable and passing it inside new macro. for_each_numa_cpu()
> takes care of the rest.
> 
> At the moment, we have 2 users of NUMA-aware enumerators. One is
> Melanox's in-tree driver, and another is Intel's in-review driver:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230216145455.661709-1-pawel.chmielewski@intel.com/
> 
> Both real-life examples follow the same pattern:
> 
> 	for_each_numa_hop_mask(cpus, prev, node) {
>  		for_each_cpu_andnot(cpu, cpus, prev) {
>  			if (cnt++ == max_num)
>  				goto out;
>  			do_something(cpu);
>  		}
> 		prev = cpus;
>  	}
> 
> With the new macro, it would look like this:
> 
> 	for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, cpu_possible_mask) {
> 		if (cnt++ == max_num)
> 			break;
> 		do_something(cpu);
>  	}
> 
> Straight conversion of existing for_each_cpu() codebase to NUMA-aware
> version with for_each_numa_hop_mask() is difficult because it doesn't
> take a user-provided cpu mask, and eventually ends up with open-coded
> double loop. With for_each_numa_cpu() it shouldn't be a brainteaser.
> Consider the NUMA-ignorant example:
> 
> 	cpumask_t cpus = get_mask();
> 	int cnt = 0, cpu;
> 
> 	for_each_cpu(cpu, cpus) {
> 		if (cnt++ == max_num)
> 			break;
> 		do_something(cpu);
>  	}
> 
> Converting it to NUMA-aware version would be as simple as:
> 
> 	cpumask_t cpus = get_mask();
> 	int node = get_node();
> 	int cnt = 0, hop, cpu;
> 
> 	for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, cpus) {
> 		if (cnt++ == max_num)
> 			break;
> 		do_something(cpu);
>  	}
> 
> The latter looks more verbose and avoids from open-coding that annoying
> double loop. Another advantage is that it works with a 'hop' parameter with
> the clear meaning of NUMA distance, and doesn't make people not familiar
> to enumerator internals bothering with current and previous masks machinery.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/topology.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/topology.h b/include/linux/topology.h
> index 4a63154fa036..62a9dd8edd77 100644
> --- a/include/linux/topology.h
> +++ b/include/linux/topology.h
> @@ -286,4 +286,24 @@ sched_numa_hop_mask(unsigned int node, unsigned int hops)
>  	     !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(mask);					       \
>  	     __hops++)
>  
> +/**
> + * for_each_numa_cpu - iterate over cpus in increasing order taking into account
> + *		       NUMA distances from a given node.
> + * @cpu: the (optionally unsigned) integer iterator
> + * @hop: the iterator variable, must be initialized to a desired minimal hop.
> + * @node: the NUMA node to start the search from.
> + *
> + * Requires rcu_lock to be held.

The comments below are incorrect (copy-paste error). I'll remove them in v2.

> + *
> + * Because it's implemented as double-loop, using 'break' inside the body of
> + * iterator may lead to undefined behaviour. Use 'goto' instead.
> + *
> + * Yields intersection of @mask and cpu_online_mask if @node == NUMA_NO_NODE.
> + */
> +#define for_each_numa_cpu(cpu, hop, node, mask)					\
> +	for ((cpu) = 0, (hop) = 0;						\
> +		(cpu) = sched_numa_find_next_cpu((mask), (cpu), (node), &(hop)),\
> +		(cpu) < nr_cpu_ids;						\
> +		(cpu)++)
> +
>  #endif /* _LINUX_TOPOLOGY_H */
> -- 
> 2.34.1