Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9848:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x8csp1407953pxf; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 08:50:18 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzevEtJU6OGt1UV+YMJA58Gz73GfDovbdlFT01VILqrhnR8t4mD+6/dbK3bCeLzPE9e66vY X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:5498:: with SMTP id r24mr9735466ejo.29.1615567818181; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 08:50:18 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1615567818; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=s6TNak8azhuY2VhibaUdNcn/r8KdrydSSsgnLZO6987Xpy75SMT2yxn2dmtQSf4gqY /N9k6ctz7V9XY2FQI1Lo2SesmOCeZU6Jev+SBWeFDesQSzlws5BBwMIY1ehwsgdvzYnJ ShNZ3zu0RVhU/QvpLdX1Tinn9RAMRhehR7nUILYIfzQiO+BnuChObSjer1eaz6mXEyTq rSHeWe3hzsZ4P34a1xT9aQi316teCyCe/JrC9pKZvp0/CqMZblj5JgLXvffcBlq0DqXF GLERJrHQbLMobfEg+LvvNniYE3TieEJ+BcphotuMoZlCecYxc/o9wtAHbs7tFYSsoq8l tiuQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:subject :organization:from:references:cc:to:dkim-signature; bh=0wU5xQKKzE8qkeDpQ0gzJ/c3p8l6vonPU4w3HcO4zus=; b=MGbnJP5lof+pc1hyboQipjAmgY+q/+0Z0rnnznF/bw0ytHgGNaKTuMFo2Otdz14HE0 g+XwoKBm2EchxXYADAGBU1ekN7MNDJx3YjhHPkqwhENPTp1ZIU7b1rMEvm+c+g7hsyoI YlYIUOZgIIPy2iT1f5D5g5Yqf0K+cerJjhqrQFPgUF1CPK1xdYw5AwnXBBukl36yfKYU fNQFsJnxh6ltfIpC2Fqepdnlr2epTy3JJImTrDKYkIic2BieCyea9kOVrKQJjVUo6zew 6FwDKubXi24dCVFLxx9VswsEtT4dE6o7Fc6njQoFICGdg9eVz/mtErqZ0qBAc7zsgZR7 bv0A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=KvCoYFy+; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id de53si4468703ejc.358.2021.03.12.08.49.54; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 08:50:18 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=KvCoYFy+; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232248AbhCLQqy (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 11:46:54 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:46060 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232303AbhCLQqw (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 11:46:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1615567611; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=0wU5xQKKzE8qkeDpQ0gzJ/c3p8l6vonPU4w3HcO4zus=; b=KvCoYFy+xKEtW56qfZzUoqGiRiSfVGOQRo/HAuMmLwQPLAAKJQTZ80iXqqE4cW9ddGl1So gZpOh2if0tBJv330tfR80RD2zTPVoRGKgfk7kO34Ln4u+vUQSKZ6CdpC0oI5f0KVZQUG3I V4YtlJkcxR/ruV+nVY82RA+/lo6CKEU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-293-U4Lm9AdVPHalfpzHt-9kYg-1; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 11:46:49 -0500 X-MC-Unique: U4Lm9AdVPHalfpzHt-9kYg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED1AB1015C84; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 16:46:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.114.197] (ovpn-114-197.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.197]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EE7610A8; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 16:46:36 +0000 (UTC) To: "Liang, Liang (Leo)" , "Deucher, Alexander" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , amd-gfx list , Andrew Morton Cc: "Huang, Ray" , "Koenig, Christian" , Mike Rapoport , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , George Kennedy References: <2f7c20ea-888f-65b6-6607-c86aab65acce@redhat.com> <15faeb97-d031-f70a-adab-f2966e0b1221@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Subject: Re: slow boot with 7fef431be9c9 ("mm/page_alloc: place pages to tail in __free_pages_core()") Message-ID: Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 17:46:33 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12.03.21 17:19, Liang, Liang (Leo) wrote: > [AMD Public Use] > > Dmesg attached. > So, looks like the "real" slowdown starts once the buddy is up and running (no surprise). [ 0.044035] Memory: 6856724K/7200304K available (14345K kernel code, 9699K rwdata, 5276K rodata, 2628K init, 12104K bss, 343324K reserved, 0K cma-reserved) [ 0.044045] random: get_random_u64 called from __kmem_cache_create+0x33/0x460 with crng_init=1 [ 0.049025] SLUB: HWalign=64, Order=0-3, MinObjects=0, CPUs=16, Nodes=1 [ 0.050036] ftrace: allocating 47158 entries in 185 pages [ 0.097487] ftrace: allocated 185 pages with 5 groups [ 0.109210] rcu: Hierarchical RCU implementation. vs. [ 0.041115] Memory: 6869396K/7200304K available (14345K kernel code, 3433K rwdata, 5284K rodata, 2624K init, 6088K bss, 330652K reserved, 0K cma-reserved) [ 0.041127] random: get_random_u64 called from __kmem_cache_create+0x31/0x430 with crng_init=1 [ 0.041309] SLUB: HWalign=64, Order=0-3, MinObjects=0, CPUs=16, Nodes=1 [ 0.041335] ftrace: allocating 47184 entries in 185 pages [ 0.055719] ftrace: allocated 185 pages with 5 groups [ 0.055863] rcu: Hierarchical RCU implementation. And it gets especially bad during ACPI table processing: [ 4.158303] ACPI: Added _OSI(Module Device) [ 4.158767] ACPI: Added _OSI(Processor Device) [ 4.159230] ACPI: Added _OSI(3.0 _SCP Extensions) [ 4.159705] ACPI: Added _OSI(Processor Aggregator Device) [ 4.160551] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-Dell-Video) [ 4.161359] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-Lenovo-NV-HDMI-Audio) [ 4.162264] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-HPI-Hybrid-Graphics) [ 17.713421] ACPI: 13 ACPI AML tables successfully acquired and loaded [ 18.716065] ACPI: [Firmware Bug]: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored [ 20.743828] ACPI: EC: EC started [ 20.744155] ACPI: EC: interrupt blocked [ 20.945956] ACPI: EC: EC_CMD/EC_SC=0x666, EC_DATA=0x662 [ 20.946618] ACPI: \_SB_.PCI0.LPC0.EC0_: Boot DSDT EC used to handle transactions [ 20.947348] ACPI: Interpreter enabled [ 20.951278] ACPI: (supports S0 S3 S4 S5) [ 20.951632] ACPI: Using IOAPIC for interrupt routing vs. [ 0.216039] ACPI: Added _OSI(Module Device) [ 0.216041] ACPI: Added _OSI(Processor Device) [ 0.216043] ACPI: Added _OSI(3.0 _SCP Extensions) [ 0.216044] ACPI: Added _OSI(Processor Aggregator Device) [ 0.216046] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-Dell-Video) [ 0.216048] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-Lenovo-NV-HDMI-Audio) [ 0.216049] ACPI: Added _OSI(Linux-HPI-Hybrid-Graphics) [ 0.228259] ACPI: 13 ACPI AML tables successfully acquired and loaded [ 0.229527] ACPI: [Firmware Bug]: BIOS _OSI(Linux) query ignored [ 0.231663] ACPI: EC: EC started [ 0.231666] ACPI: EC: interrupt blocked [ 0.233664] ACPI: EC: EC_CMD/EC_SC=0x666, EC_DATA=0x662 [ 0.233667] ACPI: \_SB_.PCI0.LPC0.EC0_: Boot DSDT EC used to handle transactions [ 0.233670] ACPI: Interpreter enabled [ 0.233685] ACPI: (supports S0 S3 S4 S5) [ 0.233687] ACPI: Using IOAPIC for interrupt routing The jump from 4.1 -> 17.7 is especially bad. Which might in fact indicate that this could be related to using some very special slow (ACPI?) memory for ordinary purposes, interfering with actual ACPI users? But again, just a wild guess, because the system is extremely slow afterwards, however, we don't have any pauses without any signs of life for that long. It would be interesting to run a simple memory bandwidth benchmark on the fast kernel with differing sizes up to running OOM to see if there is really some memory that is just horribly slow once allocated and used. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb