From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Hoan Tran <Hoan@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Pavel Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@microsoft.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
"open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
lho@amperecomputing.com, mmorana@amperecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 17:26:06 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200330092606.GC6352@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200330074246.GA14243@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 03/30/20 at 09:42am, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 28-03-20 11:31:17, Hoan Tran wrote:
> > In NUMA layout which nodes have memory ranges that span across other nodes,
> > the mm driver can detect the memory node id incorrectly.
> >
> > For example, with layout below
> > Node 0 address: 0000 xxxx 0000 xxxx
> > Node 1 address: xxxx 1111 xxxx 1111
> >
> > Note:
> > - Memory from low to high
> > - 0/1: Node id
> > - x: Invalid memory of a node
> >
> > When mm probes the memory map, without CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES
> > config, mm only checks the memory validity but not the node id.
> > Because of that, Node 1 also detects the memory from node 0 as below
> > when it scans from the start address to the end address of node 1.
> >
> > Node 0 address: 0000 xxxx xxxx xxxx
> > Node 1 address: xxxx 1111 1111 1111
> >
> > This layout could occur on any architecture. Most of them enables
> > this config by default with CONFIG_NUMA. This patch, by default, enables
> > CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES or uses early_pfn_in_nid() for NUMA.
>
> I am not opposed to this at all. It reduces the config space and that is
> a good thing on its own. The history has shown that meory layout might
> be really wild wrt NUMA. The config is only used for early_pfn_in_nid
> which is clearly an overkill.
>
> Your description doesn't really explain why this is safe though. The
> history of this config is somehow messy, though. Mike has tried
> to remove it a94b3ab7eab4 ("[PATCH] mm: remove arch independent
> NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES") just to be reintroduced by 7516795739bd
> ("[PATCH] Reintroduce NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES for powerpc") without any
> reasoning what so ever. This doesn't make it really easy see whether
> reasons for reintroduction are still there. Maybe there are some subtle
> dependencies. I do not see any TBH but that might be burried deep in an
> arch specific code.
Since on all ARCHes NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES has dependency on NUMA,
replacing it with CONFIG_NUMA seems no risk. Just for those ARCHes which
don't have CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES before, it involves a tiny
performance degradation. Besides, s390 has removed support of
NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES already.
commit 701dc81e7412daaf3c5bf4bc55d35c8b1525112a
Author: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Date: Wed Feb 19 13:29:15 2020 +0100
s390/mm: remove fake numa support
>
> > v3:
> > * Revise the patch description
> >
> > V2:
> > * Revise the patch description
> >
> > Hoan Tran (5):
> > mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA
> > powerpc: Kconfig: Remove CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES
> > x86: Kconfig: Remove CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES
> > sparc: Kconfig: Remove CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES
> > s390: Kconfig: Remove CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES
> >
> > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 9 ---------
> > arch/s390/Kconfig | 8 --------
> > arch/sparc/Kconfig | 9 ---------
> > arch/x86/Kconfig | 9 ---------
> > mm/page_alloc.c | 2 +-
> > 5 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 36 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 1.8.3.1
> >
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-30 9:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-28 18:31 [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA Hoan Tran
2020-03-28 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] " Hoan Tran
2020-03-28 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] powerpc: Kconfig: Remove CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES Hoan Tran
2020-03-28 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] x86: " Hoan Tran
2020-03-28 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] sparc: " Hoan Tran
2020-03-28 18:31 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] s390: " Hoan Tran
2020-03-29 0:19 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA Baoquan He
2020-03-30 7:44 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-30 8:04 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-30 7:42 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-30 8:16 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-30 8:28 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-30 9:21 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-03-30 9:58 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-30 10:26 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-03-30 10:43 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-31 21:56 ` [PATCH RFC] mm: remove CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP (was: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA) Mike Rapoport
2020-04-01 5:42 ` Baoquan He
2020-04-01 7:51 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-04-02 8:01 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-09 14:41 ` Baoquan He
2020-04-09 15:33 ` Michal Hocko
2020-04-10 6:46 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-30 9:26 ` Baoquan He [this message]
2020-03-30 17:51 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA Mike Rapoport
2020-03-30 18:23 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-31 8:14 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-03-31 8:55 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-31 14:03 ` Baoquan He
2020-03-31 14:21 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-31 14:31 ` Baoquan He
2020-04-03 4:46 ` Hoan Tran
2020-04-03 7:09 ` Baoquan He
2020-04-03 16:36 ` Hoan Tran
2020-04-09 16:27 ` Mike Rapoport
2020-04-10 6:50 ` Baoquan He
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=20200330092606.GC6352@MiWiFi-R3L-srv \
--to=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=Hoan@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=lho@amperecomputing.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mmorana@amperecomputing.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=pavel.tatashin@microsoft.com \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sparclinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=x86@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 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).