Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:5bc5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id os5csp201802pxb; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 03:55:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzAJgXRFMAMxsFNw1QZZIv6ZDyqIPaZmJde2f4PYOU5VaEc9OF+CnfZNM3HVcJ41+boAdtt X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6544:b0:13e:dd16:bd5b with SMTP id d4-20020a170902654400b0013edd16bd5bmr10574100pln.61.1634295314208; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 03:55:14 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1634295314; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=ehtJ14Y5V48ka1t2eL3SQGKdaiPTS+2/5oy2FQp9aiqh7QWpEXO9eOaXqHJm4kg71M YWxFWUtxmcC9gup9iEMkFCod/C+8CYU09662PMCWfWFAgnV7UDjHIpJ7lSG1C10F68a3 njkhd4n26d1ny6Wl8omB4ysSQV8K+77rtKOMLSKLJm8bGWo6/qIigBWgzk3pV/vhBhNG iu2yfBlbHdNievECQukU8/Pkodw0UsZJj5PsCmdHIKyvRw6etKEO/OKgyGTOc51UDFg9 08Kj/nZrVT/OnoZL00dWHYKWmlYRSRDE5QCFyQnnTnUJT0xHAsDNJtB5rnrwX6HBth6/ Iicg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id; bh=Qv0lhNvH+34Y0MZd3uJrf8KRo/x7o0WueGlZAhaUw60=; b=vLR7XnuVoi53UZHeRD7Bw6l2f44mOmipuPQQhGuov97YjS/vUxmsbHTraCmEWB5YLO BoGVH+JTU48g3Qp6R1T8VJRs4OWWifb4o3BOJNuGs+KtpqEukOE34gm6q3VTpKaN1GIf nCnUN7AhHX/t5E0UhjsHc7kRKfd/FHn98IUWMS1AfR+QCaKCIioKM13P0wKXNdJc4Rdk 7/O/3l0Ddsr500eNsEZ37ZQ1Z/O8R49DgXK0AD5r75VyE61f2a6Hmi8QqeaCk2biNcjO pECUnrqMSwE6U4nvJ/dZxRTz38WLyKLm5Z47nnKqZRGCbhTe8r7lU2Se7E45AYmtu5fJ kdgA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; 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=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a15si7677078pgw.631.2021.10.15.03.55.01; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 03:55:14 -0700 (PDT) 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; 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=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234916AbhJOCXB (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 14 Oct 2021 22:23:01 -0400 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.188]:24317 "EHLO szxga02-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234892AbhJOCXA (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Oct 2021 22:23:00 -0400 Received: from dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4HVqdM43fBzbfXP; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:16:23 +0800 (CST) Received: from dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.229) by dggemv704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.47) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.8; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:20:49 +0800 Received: from [10.174.178.178] (10.174.178.178) by dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2308.8; Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:20:48 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2021 10:20:48 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.0.3 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: fix numa spreading for large hash tables To: Uladzislau Rezki CC: , , , , , , References: <20210928121040.2547407-1-chenwandun@huawei.com> <20211014100157.GA1844@pc638.lan> From: Chen Wandun In-Reply-To: <20211014100157.GA1844@pc638.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.178.178] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems706-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.183) To dggpemm500002.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.229) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 在 2021/10/14 18:01, Uladzislau Rezki 写道: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 08:10:40PM +0800, Chen Wandun wrote: >> Eric Dumazet reported a strange numa spreading info in [1], and found >> commit 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings") introduced >> this issue [2]. >> >> Dig into the difference before and after this patch, page allocation has >> some difference: >> >> before: >> alloc_large_system_hash >> __vmalloc >> __vmalloc_node(..., NUMA_NO_NODE, ...) >> __vmalloc_node_range >> __vmalloc_area_node >> alloc_page /* because NUMA_NO_NODE, so choose alloc_page branch */ >> alloc_pages_current >> alloc_page_interleave /* can be proved by print policy mode */ >> >> after: >> alloc_large_system_hash >> __vmalloc >> __vmalloc_node(..., NUMA_NO_NODE, ...) >> __vmalloc_node_range >> __vmalloc_area_node >> alloc_pages_node /* choose nid by nuam_mem_id() */ >> __alloc_pages_node(nid, ....) >> >> So after commit 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings"), >> it will allocate memory in current node instead of interleaving allocate >> memory. >> >> [1] >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CANn89iL6AAyWhfxdHO+jaT075iOa3XcYn9k6JJc7JR2XYn6k_Q@mail.gmail.com/ >> >> [2] >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CANn89iLofTR=AK-QOZY87RdUZENCZUT4O6a0hvhu3_EwRMerOg@mail.gmail.com/ >> >> Fixes: 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings") >> Reported-by: Eric Dumazet >> Signed-off-by: Chen Wandun >> --- >> mm/vmalloc.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c >> index f884706c5280..48e717626e94 100644 >> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c >> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c >> @@ -2823,6 +2823,8 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid, >> unsigned int order, unsigned int nr_pages, struct page **pages) >> { >> unsigned int nr_allocated = 0; >> + struct page *page; >> + int i; >> >> /* >> * For order-0 pages we make use of bulk allocator, if >> @@ -2833,6 +2835,7 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid, >> if (!order) { >> while (nr_allocated < nr_pages) { >> unsigned int nr, nr_pages_request; >> + page = NULL; >> >> /* >> * A maximum allowed request is hard-coded and is 100 >> @@ -2842,9 +2845,23 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid, >> */ >> nr_pages_request = min(100U, nr_pages - nr_allocated); >> >> - nr = alloc_pages_bulk_array_node(gfp, nid, >> - nr_pages_request, pages + nr_allocated); >> - >> + if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) { >> > > void *vmalloc(unsigned long size) > { > return __vmalloc_node(size, 1, GFP_KERNEL, NUMA_NO_NODE, > __builtin_return_address(0)); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(vmalloc); > > > vmalloc() uses NUMA_NO_NODE, so all vmalloc calls will be reverted to a single > page allocator for NUMA and non-NUMA systems. Is it intentional to bypass the > optimized bulk allocator for non-NUMA systems? I sent a patch, it will help to solve this. [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: introduce alloc_pages_bulk_array_mempolicy to accelerate memory allocation Thanks, Wandun > > Thanks! > > -- > Vlad Rezki > . >