From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Christopher Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Keep memoryless cpuless node 0 offline
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 12:14:08 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200702064408.GD17918@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200701122110.GT2369@dhcp22.suse.cz>
* Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> [2020-07-01 14:21:10]:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 2. Also existence of dummy node also leads to inconsistent information. The
> > >>>>>> number of online nodes is inconsistent with the information in the
> > >>>>>> device-tree and resource-dump
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> 3. When the dummy node is present, single node non-Numa systems end up showing
> > >>>>>> up as NUMA systems and numa_balancing gets enabled. This will mean we take
> > >>>>>> the hit from the unnecessary numa hinting faults.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I have to say that I dislike the node online/offline state and directly
> > >>>>> exporting that to the userspace. Users should only care whether the node
> > >>>>> has memory/cpus. Numa nodes can be online without any memory. Just
> > >>>>> offline all the present memory blocks but do not physically hot remove
> > >>>>> them and you are in the same situation. If users are confused by an
> > >>>>> output of tools like numactl -H then those could be updated and hide
> > >>>>> nodes without any memory&cpus.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The autonuma problem sounds interesting but again this patch doesn't
> > >>>>> really solve the underlying problem because I strongly suspect that the
> > >>>>> problem is still there when a numa node gets all its memory offline as
> > >>>>> mentioned above.
>
> I would really appreciate a feedback to these two as well.
1. Its not just numactl that's to be fixed but all tools/utilities that
depend on /sys/devices/system/node/online. Are we saying to not rely/believe
in the output given by the kernel but do further verification?
Also how would the user space differentiate between the case where the
Kernel missed marking a node as offline to the case where the memory was
offlined on a cpuless node but node wasn't offline?.
2. Regarding the autonuma, the case of offline memory is user/admin driven,
so if there is a performance hit, its something that's driven by his
user/admin actions. Also how often do we see users offline complete memory
of cpuless node on a 2 node system?
>
> > [ 0.009726] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x00 -> Node 0
> > [ 0.009727] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x01 -> Node 0
> > [ 0.009727] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x02 -> Node 0
> > [ 0.009728] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x03 -> Node 0
> > [ 0.009731] ACPI: SRAT: Node 0 PXM 1 [mem 0x00000000-0x0009ffff]
> > [ 0.009732] ACPI: SRAT: Node 0 PXM 1 [mem 0x00100000-0xbfffffff]
> > [ 0.009733] ACPI: SRAT: Node 0 PXM 1 [mem 0x100000000-0x13fffffff]
>
> This begs a question whether ppc can do the same thing?
Certainly ppc can be made to adapt to this situation but that would be a
workaround. Do we have a reason why we think node 0 is unique and special?
If yes can we document it so that in future also people know why we consider
node 0 to be special. I do understand the *fear of the unknown* but when we
are unable to theoretically or practically come up a case, then it may
probably be better we hit the situation to understand what that unknown is?
> I would swear that we've had x86 system with node 0 but I cannot really
> find it and it is possible that it was not x86 after all...
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-02 6:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-24 9:28 [PATCH v5 0/3] Offline memoryless cpuless node 0 Srikar Dronamraju
2020-06-24 9:28 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] powerpc/numa: Set numa_node for all possible cpus Srikar Dronamraju
2020-06-24 9:48 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-06-24 9:28 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] powerpc/numa: Prefer node id queried from vphn Srikar Dronamraju
2020-06-24 10:29 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2020-06-24 9:28 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Keep memoryless cpuless node 0 offline Srikar Dronamraju
2020-06-29 14:58 ` Christopher Lameter
2020-06-30 4:01 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-07-01 12:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-01 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-01 10:04 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-07-01 10:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-01 11:01 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-07-01 11:06 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-01 11:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-01 12:21 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-02 6:44 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2020-07-02 8:41 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-02 14:32 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-07-03 9:10 ` Michal Suchánek
2020-07-03 9:24 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-03 10:59 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-03 11:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-07-03 11:46 ` Michal Hocko
2020-07-03 12:58 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-08-07 4:32 ` Andrew Morton
2020-08-07 6:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-08-07 10:04 ` Michal Suchánek
2020-08-12 6:01 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-08-18 7:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-08-18 7:37 ` Michal Hocko
2020-08-18 7:49 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2020-07-06 16:08 ` Andi Kleen
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=20200702064408.GD17918@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=ego@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=sathnaga@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).