On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 3:51 PM, Daniel J Blueman wrote: > On Monday, April 13, 2015 at 6:20:05 PM UTC+8, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Memory initialisation had been identified as one of the reasons why > large > > machines take a long time to boot. Patches were posted a long time > ago > > that attempted to move deferred initialisation into the page > allocator > > paths. This was rejected on the grounds it should not be necessary > to hurt > > the fast paths to parallelise initialisation. This series reuses > much of > > the work from that time but defers the initialisation of memory to > kswapd > > so that one thread per node initialises memory local to that node. > The > > issue is that on the machines I tested with, memory initialisation > was not > > a major contributor to boot times. I'm posting the RFC to both > review the > > series and see if it actually helps users of very large machines. > > > > After applying the series and setting the appropriate Kconfig > variable I > > see this in the boot log on a 64G machine > > > > [ 7.383764] kswapd 0 initialised deferred memory in 188ms > > [ 7.404253] kswapd 1 initialised deferred memory in 208ms > > [ 7.411044] kswapd 3 initialised deferred memory in 216ms > > [ 7.411551] kswapd 2 initialised deferred memory in 216ms > > > > On a 1TB machine, I see > > > > [ 11.913324] kswapd 0 initialised deferred memory in 1168ms > > [ 12.220011] kswapd 2 initialised deferred memory in 1476ms > > [ 12.245369] kswapd 3 initialised deferred memory in 1500ms > > [ 12.271680] kswapd 1 initialised deferred memory in 1528ms > > > > Once booted the machine appears to work as normal. Boot times were > measured > > from the time shutdown was called until ssh was available again. > In the > > 64G case, the boot time savings are negligible. On the 1TB machine, > the > > savings were 10 seconds (about 8% improvement on kernel times but > 1-2% > > overall as POST takes so long). > > > > It would be nice if the people that have access to really large > machines > > would test this series and report back if the complexity is > justified. > > Nice work! > > On an older Numascale system with 1TB memory and 256 cores/32 NUMA > nodes, platform init takes 52s (cold boot), firmware takes 84s > (includes one warm reboot), stock linux 4.0 then takes 732s to boot > [1] (due to the 700ns roundtrip, RMW cache-coherent cycles due to the > temporal writes for pagetable init and per-core store queue limits), > so there is huge potential. Same 1TB setup (256 cores, 32 NUMA nodes): unpatched 4.0: 789s [1] 2GB per node up-front: 426s [2] 4GB node 0 up-front, 0GB later nodes: 461s [3] 4GB node 0 up-front, 0.5GB later nodes: 404s [4] Compelling results at only 1TB! In the last case, we see PMD setup take 42% (168s) of the time, along with topology_init taking 39% (157s). I should be able to get data on a 7TB system this week. [1] https://resources.numascale.com/telemetry/defermem/h8qgl-defer-stock.txt [2] https://resources.numascale.com/telemetry/defermem/h8qgl-defer-2g.txt [3] https://resources.numascale.com/telemetry/defermem/h8qgl-defer-4+0.txt [4] https://resources.numascale.com/telemetry/defermem/h8qgl-defer-4+half.txt