From: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
adityag@linux.ibm.com, donettom@linux.ibm.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, shan.gavin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/base/memory: Avoid overhead from for_each_present_section_nr()
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 15:04:16 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44dff493-9d79-4343-ba81-0c262d7a5b4e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a950dd20-d7eb-429b-b638-2df68208918d@redhat.com>
On 4/11/25 12:25 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 10.04.25 16:12, Oscar Salvador wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:55:19PM +0200, Oscar Salvador wrote:
>>> All in all, I think we are better, and the code is slightly simpler?
>>
>> One thing to notice is that maybe we could further improve and leap 'nr'
>> by the number of sections_per_block, so in those scenarios where
>> a memory-block spans multiple sections this could be faster?
>
> Essentially, when we created a block we could always start with the next section that starts after the block.
>
I think it's a good point. Tried a quick test on a ARM64 machine whose memory
capacity is 1TB. Leaping 'nr' by 'sections_per_block' improves the performance a bit,
even it's not too much. The time taken by memory_dev_init() drops from 110ms to 100ms.
For the IBM Power9 machine (64GB memory) I have, there are not too much space to be
improved because the time taken by memory_dev_init() is only 10ms. I will post a patch
for review after this patch gets merged, if you agree.
for_each_present_section_nr(0, nr) {
- if (block_id != ULONG_MAX && memory_block_id(nr) == block_id)
- continue;
-
- block_id = memory_block_id(nr);
- ret = add_memory_block(block_id, MEM_ONLINE, NULL, NULL);
+ ret = add_memory_block(memory_block_id(nr), MEM_ONLINE, NULL, NULL);
if (ret) {
panic("%s() failed to add memory block: %d\n",
__func__, ret);
}
+
+ /* Align to next block, minus one section */
+ nr = ALIGN(nr + 1, sections_per_block) - 1;
}
Thanks,
Gavin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-11 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-10 12:51 Gavin Shan
2025-04-10 13:08 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 13:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-10 13:55 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:12 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:25 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-11 5:04 ` Gavin Shan [this message]
2025-04-11 8:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-11 8:29 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-10 15:45 ` Aditya Gupta
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=44dff493-9d79-4343-ba81-0c262d7a5b4e@redhat.com \
--to=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=donettom@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shan.gavin@gmail.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®