From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41A13C2D0EB for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 09:58:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15BDE2072E for ; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 09:58:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1585562329; bh=EtWOn25Oz9Do1M3pf0Bdh1cgolpiN/DDYknvZuJqAuw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=abX1RKcvgwyKULrKEab/xzyaWljFf+RVBF3jyq4qOVxlk4UX07AN95ZqHY0c51gp7 MZoHIuB6svdwFcaR5U1fDCEWYTq+PfPMlZ7bMEZ1+T1f7+v9h7UitjKUu7sqUUjDTk 8l2FywD1CD3S0rRN/6MC9a18L17W5gY8vgkb4v9w= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728794AbgC3J6s (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 05:58:48 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:46383 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727522AbgC3J6r (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 05:58:47 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id j17so20737559wru.13; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 02:58:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=RAW4dI5AqDOZg2OFBhTf/EVo0m3y8bG8p0ACgPsFWtE=; b=OCp3chht8upmlHjiegUSpYA7Zm5wIKCsvsT4Tl9GUG9ZMi/4WDCkv0aTPhwRfkPi1o n81N75mvN0d5J+FzmZG0lqbYJ8NVmmHR9GRM3ll8E7WmpvsInPiN1Ibw+uShxy+EJjvq RKR9sBwe2tuK0O6oSMg300FhyuL1sSXxpZ4Tki6iQyE0dbXp5+sn6nt08wJZyugBXBFA yP8Z2xLUZD/7oLdw1r2STra+7+YKLSFvP/4qG7yosXmfrPV2BNi8Ph6HzUkvuhkwQwto Eb+WUGC7+SQWkzIcl+LxdFvg+BTtCmXoImPX5s92gUJTMClylazhmufGeNk5zZIINyRO y8/w== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3bzuQS6RZNLNUQir+N9k06RmVj3w2m4jw1LIkIs6uQ3iBZ/Bza Bgwd8ozwrE7m/6MYOzT/cUQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vs2ADx9iXcEtG7i4t0y2sXGzETHyH4fleW4u+faHVS+T4YFrF+aBgCdG9nD2ekBmdttmSU8rw== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:460f:: with SMTP id t15mr14129460wrq.413.1585562325855; Mon, 30 Mar 2020 02:58:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip-37-188-180-223.eurotel.cz. [37.188.180.223]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b199sm17339431wme.23.2020.03.30.02.58.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Mar 2020 02:58:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 11:58:43 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Mike Rapoport Cc: Hoan Tran , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Oscar Salvador , Pavel Tatashin , Alexander Duyck , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , "David S. Miller" , Heiko Carstens , Vasily Gorbik , Christian Borntraeger , "open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lho@amperecomputing.com, mmorana@amperecomputing.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA Message-ID: <20200330095843.GF14243@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <1585420282-25630-1-git-send-email-Hoan@os.amperecomputing.com> <20200330074246.GA14243@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200330092127.GB30942@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200330092127.GB30942@linux.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon 30-03-20 12:21:27, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 09:42:46AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Sat 28-03-20 11:31:17, Hoan Tran wrote: > > > In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes, > > > the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly. > > > > > > For example, with layout below > > > Node 0 address: 0000 xxxx 0000 xxxx > > > Node 1 address: xxxx 1111 xxxx 1111 > > > > > > Note: > > > - Memory from low to high > > > - 0/1: Node id > > > - x: Invalid memory of a node > > > > > > When mm probes the memory map, without CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES > > > config, mm only checks the memory validity but not the node id. > > > Because of that, Node 1 also detects the memory from node 0 as below > > > when it scans from the start address to the end address of node 1. > > > > > > Node 0 address: 0000 xxxx xxxx xxxx > > > Node 1 address: xxxx 1111 1111 1111 > > > > > > This layout could occur on any architecture. Most of them enables > > > this config by default with CONFIG_NUMA. This patch, by default, enables > > > CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES or uses early_pfn_in_nid() for NUMA. > > > > I am not opposed to this at all. It reduces the config space and that is > > a good thing on its own. The history has shown that meory layout might > > be really wild wrt NUMA. The config is only used for early_pfn_in_nid > > which is clearly an overkill. > > > > Your description doesn't really explain why this is safe though. The > > history of this config is somehow messy, though. Mike has tried > > to remove it a94b3ab7eab4 ("[PATCH] mm: remove arch independent > > NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES") just to be reintroduced by 7516795739bd > > ("[PATCH] Reintroduce NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES for powerpc") without any > > reasoning what so ever. This doesn't make it really easy see whether > > reasons for reintroduction are still there. Maybe there are some subtle > > dependencies. I do not see any TBH but that might be burried deep in an > > arch specific code. > > Well, back then early_pfn_in_nid() was arch-dependant, today everyone > except ia64 rely on HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP. What would it take to make ia64 use HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP? I would really love to see that thing go away. It is causing problems when people try to use memblock api. > So, if the memblock node map > is correct, that using CONFIG_NUMA instead of CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES > would only mean that early_pfn_in_nid() will cost several cycles more on > architectures that didn't select CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES (i.e. arm64 > and sh). Do we have any idea on how much of an overhead that is? Because this is per each pfn so it can accumulate a lot! > Agian, ia64 is an exception here. Thanks for the clarification! -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs