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=-0.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 CF078C31E44 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 01:06:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A690F20645 for ; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 01:06:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ExdvbaRj"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="GQnMsjM8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A690F20645 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=O8X3gZqG+mAgQOnXWl/Vj9BAbi4Xoltvjen9CzXqCAg=; b=ExdvbaRjG/fVKv/KwX65zQhrT UoonfQmyRrCBTKafiptDRCwKleiPuDpTY2z6bvZyZHhpkDqI/ZvcOjmgydMqqbf+i4O1uroDYQSAr zrNK/gNoeXwBzw4YlSowQ8hhxvkw9bJjaNGs637eDag2FaOjheSlu+womEGiz7nvmJgXg3CjNNizc 1Ev9bGLRFyXrrERGmknmrdHXMP13L0bHB2/qKfpN7ufAF9WHkQh+Ye5cmlksk144ttE5A/zH7aDty 3ck9sAqir4KUjODLNltXAcjaLuqhH6K5CDTp6QwCMIim/GzpvWsjGHwcukyCQIB/JL0SfHMyCgGUs qFkcjJPuw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1harid-00082A-Qe; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 01:06:27 +0000 Received: from mail-pf1-x441.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::441]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1haria-00081r-SU for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 12 Jun 2019 01:06:26 +0000 Received: by mail-pf1-x441.google.com with SMTP id x15so8569046pfq.0 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=MogpfsEDMN5cINGy9NYc5BobLdtPxSxSh+1uml2YEE4=; b=GQnMsjM8WfvHCd2nvoofF6j3WHIWn4KeV6xHyiFVP08PELSGNOvdMir1AHt6KF7bPU OfixU6Qgkvtq+LGc8P9OQ0sI+w0blIDkImxCRdF+BrHOKiTpYCDB7fNol6ByR2hXOVl7 wjJfHrG3NJDqAAgo/foug204XnRFrpeSSP+GtsmYAaS66WCP7c2672G7WhWlhy+2/Yrc FvoWZWIB0e5Ou/I6rHgZLNZoaADqHkRPp0LhjOSu6OhbqMZ5K6MAkVyAMCo+jF0Rbgze ttW3kS6aiC0RnY/xlOfU+rXrBYmEDXEHJtl9XTOoY9vu92MfNSMg3Z/UK9owvacfjJrP OjyQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=MogpfsEDMN5cINGy9NYc5BobLdtPxSxSh+1uml2YEE4=; b=fs11IEA3nRV6rtAoSoq10qSNJg0CFMrth3GXrzD+5Rh3ZKIvb+77hmaQQ5OW6zLkOa sC3LE/SExgbGtRocLv5sn0Q3fvPAGrBdcMYTi+9L52B3l9vQbZ9xm2f+LDP1VBuER07d j0ECOE+8BIwEMhXJDg+MkrUEP5xTFci6mF6AcYpP8ANKJsTPUPN/A7br0y0if5jyN7SE 7WCj/bk21VwUOz3CXhUWsmAXIg6BWiiP3xXbj+zgoPFbe14w4aTnDGLoGGM4co03UwmA ES9UexgW33dTDRgI2nmKCviu0pR8gbpYiUnZpIkb0VqvGU8Kdh2Fj7yv4oaJZnX7Gov2 ndrA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWWYJsdDsthnp/DqbwegouUZOV1RRavJIi3/7wOPy7r4m5H4a5c EEk+iyZZ3Ttj745TqxFmR4Q= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy096Fat/UGv0A1DkMZjMJLB5J0pXHMFFJm37+yz0PHphj/G+xIoifblGkB8F2xy+sSOEQjgw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:254e:: with SMTP id j72mr30658331pje.11.1560301583425; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [0.0.0.0] (104.129.187.94.16clouds.com. [104.129.187.94]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a18sm3530668pjq.0.2019.06.11.18.06.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 18:06:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 0/3] remain and optimize memblock_next_valid_pfn on arm and arm64 To: Hanjun Guo , Ard Biesheuvel References: <1534907237-2982-1-git-send-email-jia.he@hxt-semitech.com> <20180907144447.GD12788@arm.com> <84b8e874-2a52-274c-4806-968470e66a08@huawei.com> <2de74de9-35b0-5e62-d822-1be59f0ef605@huawei.com> From: Jia He Organization: ARM Message-ID: <8fdf5545-21b7-354c-4c4b-e1e92048864f@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 09:05:59 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2de74de9-35b0-5e62-d822-1be59f0ef605@huawei.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190611_180624_950379_DDBBA8E4 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 33.07 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Michal Hocko , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Wei Yang , Linux-MM , James Morse , Eugeniu Rosca , Petr Tesarik , Nikolay Borisov , Russell King , Daniel Jordan , AKASHI Takahiro , Mel Gorman , Andrey Ryabinin , Laura Abbott , Daniel Vacek , Vladimir Murzin , Kees Cook , Philip Derrin , YASUAKI ISHIMATSU , Jia He , Ard Biesheuvel , Kemi Wang , Vlastimil Babka , linux-arm-kernel , Steve Capper , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Gioh Kim , Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Hanjun On 2019/6/11 23:18, Hanjun Guo wrote: > Hello Ard, > > Thanks for the reply, please see my comments inline. > > On 2019/6/10 21:16, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On Sat, 8 Jun 2019 at 06:22, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> Hi Ard, Will, >>> >>> This week we were trying to debug an issue of time consuming in mem_init(), >>> and leading to this similar solution form Jia He, so I would like to bring this >>> thread back, please see my detail test result below. >>> >>> On 2018/9/7 22:44, Will Deacon wrote: >>>> On Thu, Sep 06, 2018 at 01:24:22PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>>>> On 22 August 2018 at 05:07, Jia He wrote: >>>>>> Commit b92df1de5d28 ("mm: page_alloc: skip over regions of invalid pfns >>>>>> where possible") optimized the loop in memmap_init_zone(). But it causes >>>>>> possible panic bug. So Daniel Vacek reverted it later. >>>>>> >>>>>> But as suggested by Daniel Vacek, it is fine to using memblock to skip >>>>>> gaps and finding next valid frame with CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID. >>>>>> >>>>>> More from what Daniel said: >>>>>> "On arm and arm64, memblock is used by default. But generic version of >>>>>> pfn_valid() is based on mem sections and memblock_next_valid_pfn() does >>>>>> not always return the next valid one but skips more resulting in some >>>>>> valid frames to be skipped (as if they were invalid). And that's why >>>>>> kernel was eventually crashing on some !arm machines." >>>>>> >>>>>> About the performance consideration: >>>>>> As said by James in b92df1de5, >>>>>> "I have tested this patch on a virtual model of a Samurai CPU with a >>>>>> sparse memory map. The kernel boot time drops from 109 to 62 seconds." >>>>>> Thus it would be better if we remain memblock_next_valid_pfn on arm/arm64. >>>>>> >>>>>> Besides we can remain memblock_next_valid_pfn, there is still some room >>>>>> for improvement. After this set, I can see the time overhead of memmap_init >>>>>> is reduced from 27956us to 13537us in my armv8a server(QDF2400 with 96G >>>>>> memory, pagesize 64k). I believe arm server will benefit more if memory is >>>>>> larger than TBs >>>>>> >>>>> OK so we can summarize the benefits of this series as follows: >>>>> - boot time on a virtual model of a Samurai CPU drops from 109 to 62 seconds >>>>> - boot time on a QDF2400 arm64 server with 96 GB of RAM drops by ~15 >>>>> *milliseconds* >>>>> >>>>> Google was not very helpful in figuring out what a Samurai CPU is and >>>>> why we should care about the boot time of Linux running on a virtual >>>>> model of it, and the 15 ms speedup is not that compelling either. >>> Testing this patch set on top of Kunpeng 920 based ARM64 server, with >>> 384G memory in total, we got the time consuming below >>> >>> without this patch set with this patch set >>> mem_init() 13310ms 1415ms >>> >>> So we got about 8x speedup on this machine, which is very impressive. >>> >> Yes, this is impressive. But does it matter in the grand scheme of >> things? > It matters for this machine, because it's for storage and there is > a watchdog and the time consuming triggers the watchdog. > >> How much time does this system take to arrive at this point >> from power on? > Sorry, I don't have such data, as the arch timer is not initialized > and I didn't see the time stamp at this point, but I read the cycles > from arch timer before and after the time consuming function to get > how much time consumed. > >>> The time consuming is related the memory DIMM size and where to locate those >>> memory DIMMs in the slots. In above case, we are using 16G memory DIMM. >>> We also tested 1T memory with 64G size for each memory DIMM on another ARM64 >>> machine, the time consuming reduced from 20s to 2s (I think it's related to >>> firmware implementations). >>> >> I agree that this optimization looks good in isolation, but the fact >> that you spotted a bug justifies my skepticism at the time. On the >> other hand, now that we have several independent reports (from you, >> but also from the Renesas folks) that the speedup is worthwhile for >> real world use cases, I think it does make sense to revisit it. > Thank you very much for taking care of this :) > >> So what I would like to see is the patch set being proposed again, >> with the new data points added for documentation. Also, the commit >> logs need to crystal clear about how the meaning of PFN validity >> differs between ARM and other architectures, and why the assumptions >> that the optimization is based on are guaranteed to hold. > I think Jia He no longer works for HXT, if don't mind, I can repost > this patch set with Jia He's authority unchanged. Ok, I don't mind that, thanks for your followup :) --- Cheers, Justin (Jia He) _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel