linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	guro@fb.com, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v0] mm/slub: Let number of online CPUs determine the slub page order
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 23:03:06 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210126230305.GD30941@willie-the-truck> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <66652406-25e4-a9e7-45a1-8ad14d2e8a36@suse.cz>

On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 12:20:14PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 1/23/21 1:32 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >> PowerPC PowerNV Host: (160 cpus)
> >> num_online_cpus 1 num_present_cpus 160 num_possible_cpus 160 nr_cpu_ids 160
> >>
> >> PowerPC pseries KVM guest: (-smp 16,maxcpus=160)
> >> num_online_cpus 1 num_present_cpus 16 num_possible_cpus 160 nr_cpu_ids 160
> >>
> >> That's what I see on powerpc, hence I thought num_present_cpus() could
> >> be the correct one to use in slub page order calculation.
> > 
> > num_present_cpus() is set to 1 on arm64 until secondaries cpus boot
> > 
> > arm64 224cpus acpi host:
> > num_online_cpus 1 num_present_cpus 1 num_possible_cpus 224 nr_cpu_ids 224
> > arm64 8cpus DT host:
> > num_online_cpus 1 num_present_cpus 1 num_possible_cpus 8 nr_cpu_ids 8
> > arm64 8cpus qemu-system-aarch64 (-smp 8,maxcpus=256)
> > num_online_cpus 1 num_present_cpus 1 num_possible_cpus 8 nr_cpu_ids 8
> 
> I would have expected num_present_cpus to be 224, 8, 8, respectively.
> 
> > Then present and online increase to num_possible_cpus once all cpus are booted
> > 
> >>
> >> >
> >> > What about heuristic:
> >> > - num_online_cpus() > 1 - we trust that and use it
> >> > - otherwise nr_cpu_ids
> >> > Would that work? Too arbitrary?
> >>
> >> Looking at the following snippet from include/linux/cpumask.h, it
> >> appears that num_present_cpus() should be reasonable compromise
> >> between online and possible/nr_cpus_ids to use here.
> >>
> >> /*
> >>  * The following particular system cpumasks and operations manage
> >>  * possible, present, active and online cpus.
> >>  *
> >>  *     cpu_possible_mask- has bit 'cpu' set iff cpu is populatable
> >>  *     cpu_present_mask - has bit 'cpu' set iff cpu is populated
> >>  *     cpu_online_mask  - has bit 'cpu' set iff cpu available to scheduler
> >>  *     cpu_active_mask  - has bit 'cpu' set iff cpu available to migration
> >>  *
> >>  *  If !CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU, present == possible, and active == online.
> >>  *
> >>  *  The cpu_possible_mask is fixed at boot time, as the set of CPU id's
> >>  *  that it is possible might ever be plugged in at anytime during the
> >>  *  life of that system boot.  The cpu_present_mask is dynamic(*),
> >>  *  representing which CPUs are currently plugged in.  And
> >>  *  cpu_online_mask is the dynamic subset of cpu_present_mask,
> >>  *  indicating those CPUs available for scheduling.
> >>  *
> >>  *  If HOTPLUG is enabled, then cpu_possible_mask is forced to have
> >>  *  all NR_CPUS bits set, otherwise it is just the set of CPUs that
> >>  *  ACPI reports present at boot.
> >>  *
> >>  *  If HOTPLUG is enabled, then cpu_present_mask varies dynamically,
> >>  *  depending on what ACPI reports as currently plugged in, otherwise
> >>  *  cpu_present_mask is just a copy of cpu_possible_mask.
> >>  *
> >>  *  (*) Well, cpu_present_mask is dynamic in the hotplug case.  If not
> >>  *      hotplug, it's a copy of cpu_possible_mask, hence fixed at boot.
> >>  */
> >>
> >> So for host systems, present is (usually) equal to possible and for
> > 
> > But "cpu_present_mask varies dynamically,  depending on what ACPI
> > reports as currently plugged in"
> > 
> > So it should varies when secondaries cpus are booted
> 
> Hm, but booting the secondaries is just a software (kernel) action? They are
> already physically there, so it seems to me as if the cpu_present_mask is not
> populated correctly on arm64, and it's just a mirror of cpu_online_mask?

I think the present_mask retains CPUs if they are hotplugged off, whereas
the online mask does not. We can't really do any better on arm64, as there's
no way of telling that a CPU is present until we've seen it.

Will


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-26 23:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-18  8:27 [RFC PATCH v0] mm/slub: Let number of online CPUs determine the slub page order Bharata B Rao
2020-11-18 11:25 ` Vlastimil Babka
2020-11-18 19:34   ` Roman Gushchin
2020-11-18 19:53     ` David Rientjes
2021-01-20 17:36 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-21  5:30   ` Bharata B Rao
2021-01-21  9:09     ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-21 10:01     ` Christoph Lameter
2021-01-21 10:48       ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-21 18:19       ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-22  8:03         ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-22 12:03           ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-22 13:16             ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-23  5:16             ` Bharata B Rao
2021-01-23 12:32               ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-25 11:20                 ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-26 23:03                   ` Will Deacon [this message]
2021-01-27  9:10                     ` Christoph Lameter
2021-01-27 11:04                       ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-02-03 11:10                         ` Bharata B Rao
2021-02-04  7:32                           ` Vincent Guittot
2021-02-04  9:07                             ` Christoph Lameter
2021-02-04  9:33                           ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-02-08 13:41                             ` [PATCH] mm, slub: better heuristic for number of cpus when calculating slab order Vlastimil Babka
2021-02-08 14:54                               ` Vincent Guittot
2021-02-10 14:07                               ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-22 13:05         ` [RFC PATCH v0] mm/slub: Let number of online CPUs determine the slub page order Jann Horn
2021-01-22 13:09           ` Jann Horn
2021-01-22 15:27           ` Vlastimil Babka
2021-01-25  4:28           ` Bharata B Rao
2021-01-26  8:52         ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-26 13:38           ` Vincent Guittot
2021-01-26 13:59             ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-28 13:45               ` Mel Gorman
2021-01-28 13:57                 ` Michal Hocko
2021-01-28 14:42                   ` Mel Gorman

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=20210126230305.GD30941@willie-the-truck \
    --to=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=bharata@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=cl@linux.com \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=rientjes@google.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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 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).