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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 2C3F8C43441 for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 23:27:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F366420869 for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 23:27:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org F366420869 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389103AbeKLJRu (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2018 04:17:50 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:48392 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388712AbeKLJRt (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2018 04:17:49 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 11 Nov 2018 15:27:35 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,493,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="85045249" Received: from ahduyck-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.251.10.23]) ([10.251.10.23]) by fmsmga007.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 11 Nov 2018 15:27:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [driver-core PATCH v6 2/9] async: Add support for queueing on specific NUMA node To: Greg KH , Dan Williams Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-nvdimm , Tejun Heo , Andrew Morton , Linux-pm mailing list , jiangshanlai@gmail.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Brown, Len" , Pavel Machek , zwisler@kernel.org, Dave Jiang , bvanassche@acm.org References: <154170028986.12967.2108024712555179678.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <154170041079.12967.13132220574997822111.stgit@ahduyck-desk1.jf.intel.com> <20181111193208.GB8332@kroah.com> <20181111203541.GB16871@kroah.com> From: Alexander Duyck Message-ID: <77b6544a-2a32-b8a4-3f3f-575193f04302@linux.intel.com> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 15:27:32 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181111203541.GB16871@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/11/2018 12:35 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:53:20AM -0800, Dan Williams wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 11, 2018 at 11:32 AM Greg KH wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 10:06:50AM -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: >>>> Introduce four new variants of the async_schedule_ functions that allow >>>> scheduling on a specific NUMA node. >>>> >>>> The first two functions are async_schedule_near and >>>> async_schedule_near_domain end up mapping to async_schedule and >>>> async_schedule_domain, but provide NUMA node specific functionality. They >>>> replace the original functions which were moved to inline function >>>> definitions that call the new functions while passing NUMA_NO_NODE. >>>> >>>> The second two functions are async_schedule_dev and >>>> async_schedule_dev_domain which provide NUMA specific functionality when >>>> passing a device as the data member and that device has a NUMA node other >>>> than NUMA_NO_NODE. >>>> >>>> The main motivation behind this is to address the need to be able to >>>> schedule device specific init work on specific NUMA nodes in order to >>>> improve performance of memory initialization. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck >>>> --- >>> >>> No one else from Intel has reviewed/verified this code at all? >>> >>> Please take advantages of the resources you have that most people do >>> not, get reviewes from your coworkers please before you send this out >>> again, as they can give you valuable help before the community has to >>> review the code... >> >> I tend to be suspicious of code that arrives on the mailing list >> day-one with a series of company-internal reviewed-by tags. Sometimes >> there is preliminary work that can be done internally, but I think we >> should prefer to do review in the open as much as possible where it >> does not waste community time. Alex and I did reach a general internal >> consensus to send this out and get community feedback, but I assumed >> to do the bulk of the review in parallel with everyone else. That said >> I think it's fine to ask for some other acks before you take a look, >> but let's do that in the open. > > Doing it in the open is great, see my response to Pavel for the history > of why I am normally suspicious of this, and why I wrote the above. > > Also this patchset has had a long history of me asking for things, and > not seeing the changes happen (hint, where are the benchmark numbers I > asked for a long time ago?) Touching the driver core like this is > tricky, and without others helping in review and test, it makes me > suspicious that it is not happening. > > This would be a great time for some other people to do that review :) > > thanks, > > greg k-h Is there any specific benchmark test you were wanting me to run? As far as crude numbers this patch set started out specifically focused on patch 9/9, but I thought it best to apply it more generically as I found we could still run into the issue if we enabled async_probe. What I have seen on several systems is a pretty significant improvement in initialization time for persistent memory. In the case of 3TB of memory being initialized on a single node the improvement in the worst case was from about 36s down to 26s for total initialization time. I plan to resubmit this set after plumber's since there were a few typos and bits of comment left over in a patch description that needed to be sorted out. I will try to make certain to have any benchmark data I have included with the set the next time I put it out. Thanks. - Alex