From: Paul Sherman <shermanpauldylan@gmail.com>
To: linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: tj@kernel.org, vbabka@suse.cz, dennis@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Paul Sherman <shermanpauldylan@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH] mm/percpu: allow embed allocator when total size fits in vmalloc
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2026 16:16:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260717231616.9126-1-shermanpauldylan@gmail.com> (raw)
On large NUMA systems (e.g. 4-node 128GB), the physical span between
NUMA nodes may exceed 75% of vmalloc space even though the total percpu
allocation is tiny (e.g. ~6MB for 64 CPUs).
The 75% check was designed for pcpu_get_vm_areas() used by dynamic
percpu chunks, where vmalloc congruency is required. The embed
allocator uses the linear map directly for the first chunk -- physical
addresses are accessible as virtual addresses without vmalloc mapping.
The relevant constraint is total percpu size, not physical span.
Replace the unconditional fallback with a total-size check: if the
aggregate percpu allocation fits within 75% of vmalloc space, proceed
with embed regardless of physical NUMA span. Systems where total percpu
size genuinely exceeds the vmalloc bound retain the page allocator
fallback.
Tested on Sophgo SG2042 (64-hart, 4-NUMA, 128GB DDR4, RISC-V Sv39):
percpu: embed: span 0x17def7a000 > vmalloc 75% but total 0x5c0000
fits -- linear map used
percpu: Embedded 23 pages/cpu s54168 r8192 d31848 u94208
Link: https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1707.3/00337.html
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Dennis Zhou <dennis@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paul Sherman <shermanpauldylan@gmail.com>
---
This fix is inert on systems where the original check never fired;
it only activates when physical span exceeds 75% of vmalloc but total
percpu size does not.
Architecture analysis:
Architecture | vmalloc | phys span | total percpu | result
---------------|--------------|--------------|--------------|--------
RISC-V Sv39 | ~88 GB | ~102 GB | ~6 MB | fixed
RISC-V Sv48 | ~88 TB | ~102 GB | ~6 MB | unaffected
RISC-V Sv57 | ~44 PB | ~102 GB | ~6 MB | unaffected
ARM64 large | ~248 TB | varies | tiny | unaffected
32-bit NUMA | ~128 MB | varies | may exceed | correct fallback
Tejun Heo noted in 2017 [Link] that the only constraint is vmalloc
size relative to NUMA node distances, and that making vmalloc bigger
would be the best fix. On RISC-V Sv39 with 88GB vmalloc and 102GB
physical NUMA span that is not an option -- but the embed allocator
does not need congruent vmalloc mapping for the first chunk anyway.
mm/percpu.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/percpu.c b/mm/percpu.c
index b0676b8054ed..72695778872c 100644
--- a/mm/percpu.c
+++ b/mm/percpu.c
@@ -3069,13 +3069,32 @@ int __init pcpu_embed_first_chunk(size_t reserved_size, size_t dyn_size,
/* warn if maximum distance is further than 75% of vmalloc space */
if (max_distance > VMALLOC_TOTAL * 3 / 4) {
- pr_warn("max_distance=0x%lx too large for vmalloc space 0x%lx\n",
+ pr_warn("percpu: embed: max_distance=0x%lx too large for vmalloc space 0x%lx\n",
max_distance, VMALLOC_TOTAL);
#ifdef CONFIG_NEED_PER_CPU_PAGE_FIRST_CHUNK
- /* and fail if we have fallback */
- rc = -EINVAL;
- goto out_free_areas;
-#endif
+ /*
+ * The embed allocator uses the linear map directly for the
+ * first chunk -- physical addresses are accessible as virtual
+ * addresses without vmalloc mapping. The 75% check was designed
+ * for pcpu_get_vm_areas() (dynamic chunks) where vmalloc
+ * congruency is required. On large NUMA systems, physical span
+ * between nodes may exceed vmalloc bounds even though total
+ * percpu size is tiny. Check total size, not physical span.
+ */
+ {
+ unsigned long total_size = 0;
+ for (group = 0; group < ai->nr_groups; group++)
+ total_size += (unsigned long)ai->unit_size *
+ ai->groups[group].nr_units;
+ if (total_size > VMALLOC_TOTAL * 3 / 4) {
+ rc = -EINVAL;
+ goto out_free_areas;
+ }
+ pr_info("percpu: embed: span 0x%lx > vmalloc 75%%"
+ " but total 0x%lx fits -- linear map used\n",
+ max_distance, total_size);
+ }
+#endif /* CONFIG_NEED_PER_CPU_PAGE_FIRST_CHUNK */
}
/*
--
2.53.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-17 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-17 23:16 Paul Sherman [this message]
2026-07-18 0:23 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260717231616.9126-1-shermanpauldylan@gmail.com \
--to=shermanpauldylan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dennis@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox