All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: len.brown@intel.com, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org,
	jiangshanlai@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	zwisler@kernel.org, pavel@ucw.cz, rafael@kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 15:19:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba72f007-84e2-6fe0-b128-d876dadef5f5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180926220957.GB270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>

On 9/26/2018 3:09 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:05:17PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> I am using unbound workqueues. However there isn't an interface that
>> exposes the NUMA bits of them directly. All I am doing with this
>> patch is adding "queue_work_near" which takes a NUMA node as an
>> argument and then copies the logic of "queue_work_on" with the
>> exception that I am doing a check to verify that there is an
>> intersection between wq_unbound_cpumask and the cpumask of the node,
>> and then passing a CPU from that intersection into "__queue_work".
> 
> Can it just take a cpu id and not feed that to __queue_work()?  That
> looks like a lot of extra logic.
> 
> Thanks.

I could just use queue_work_on probably, but is there any issue if I am 
passing CPU values that are not in the wq_unbound_cpumask? That was 
mostly my concern. Also for an unbound queue do I need to worry about 
the hotplug lock? I wasn't sure if that was the case or not as I know it 
is called out as something to be concerned with using queue_work_on, but 
in __queue_work the value is just used to determine which node to grab a 
work queue from.

I forgot to address your question about the advantages. They are pretty 
significant. The test system I was working with was initializing 3TB of 
nvdimm memory per node. If the node is aligned it takes something like 
24 seconds, whereas an unaligned core can take 36 seconds or more.

Thanks.

- Alex
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, len.brown@intel.com,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, rafael@kernel.org,
	vishal.l.verma@intel.com, jiangshanlai@gmail.com, pavel@ucw.cz,
	zwisler@kernel.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 15:19:21 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba72f007-84e2-6fe0-b128-d876dadef5f5@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180926220957.GB270328@devbig004.ftw2.facebook.com>

On 9/26/2018 3:09 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 03:05:17PM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> I am using unbound workqueues. However there isn't an interface that
>> exposes the NUMA bits of them directly. All I am doing with this
>> patch is adding "queue_work_near" which takes a NUMA node as an
>> argument and then copies the logic of "queue_work_on" with the
>> exception that I am doing a check to verify that there is an
>> intersection between wq_unbound_cpumask and the cpumask of the node,
>> and then passing a CPU from that intersection into "__queue_work".
> 
> Can it just take a cpu id and not feed that to __queue_work()?  That
> looks like a lot of extra logic.
> 
> Thanks.

I could just use queue_work_on probably, but is there any issue if I am 
passing CPU values that are not in the wq_unbound_cpumask? That was 
mostly my concern. Also for an unbound queue do I need to worry about 
the hotplug lock? I wasn't sure if that was the case or not as I know it 
is called out as something to be concerned with using queue_work_on, but 
in __queue_work the value is just used to determine which node to grab a 
work queue from.

I forgot to address your question about the advantages. They are pretty 
significant. The test system I was working with was initializing 3TB of 
nvdimm memory per node. If the node is aligned it takes something like 
24 seconds, whereas an unaligned core can take 36 seconds or more.

Thanks.

- Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2018-09-26 22:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-26 21:51 [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 0/5] Add NUMA aware async_schedule calls Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 1/5] workqueue: Provide queue_work_near to queue work near a given NUMA node Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:53   ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 21:53     ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 21:53     ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:05     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 22:05       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 22:09       ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:09         ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:09         ` Tejun Heo
2018-09-26 22:19         ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2018-09-26 22:19           ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 16:01           ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 16:01             ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 16:01             ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-01 21:54             ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 21:54               ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-01 21:54               ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 17:41               ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 17:41                 ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 17:41                 ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:23                 ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:23                   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:23                   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 18:41                   ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 18:41                     ` Tejun Heo
2018-10-02 20:49                     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 20:49                       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-10-02 20:49                       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 2/5] async: Add support for queueing on specific " Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27  0:31   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:31     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:31     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 15:16     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:16       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:16       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 19:48       ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 19:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 20:03         ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 20:03           ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 3/5] driver core: Probe devices asynchronously instead of the driver Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27  0:48   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:48     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27  0:48     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-27 15:27     ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:27       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-27 15:27       ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28  2:48       ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28  2:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28  2:48         ` Dan Williams
2018-09-26 21:51 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 4/5] driver core: Use new async_schedule_dev command Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:51   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28 17:42   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:42     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:42     ` Dan Williams
2018-09-26 21:52 ` [RFC workqueue/driver-core PATCH 5/5] nvdimm: Schedule device registration on node local to the device Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:52   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-26 21:52   ` Alexander Duyck
2018-09-28 17:46   ` Dan Williams
2018-09-28 17:46     ` Dan Williams

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=ba72f007-84e2-6fe0-b128-d876dadef5f5@linux.intel.com \
    --to=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=tj@kernel.org \
    --cc=zwisler@kernel.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.