From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Hoan Tran <hoan@os.amperecomputing.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.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>,
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: Fri, 3 Apr 2020 15:09:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200403070904.GO2402@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cc717f09-2b18-b242-e438-3ec730c5dac0@os.amperecomputing.com>
On 04/02/20 at 09:46pm, Hoan Tran wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> On 3/31/20 7:31 AM, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 03/31/20 at 04:21pm, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 31-03-20 22:03:32, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > > Hi Michal,
> > > >
> > > > On 03/31/20 at 10:55am, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > > On Tue 31-03-20 11:14:23, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > > > > > Maybe I mis-read the code, but I don't see how this could happen. In the
> > > > > > HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP=y case, free_area_init_node() calls
> > > > > > calculate_node_totalpages() that ensures that node->node_zones are entirely
> > > > > > within the node because this is checked in zone_spanned_pages_in_node().
> > > > >
> > > > > zone_spanned_pages_in_node does chech the zone boundaries are within the
> > > > > node boundaries. But that doesn't really tell anything about other
> > > > > potential zones interleaving with the physical memory range.
> > > > > zone->spanned_pages simply gives the physical range for the zone
> > > > > including holes. Interleaving nodes are essentially a hole
> > > > > (__absent_pages_in_range is going to skip those).
> > > > >
> > > > > That means that when free_area_init_core simply goes over the whole
> > > > > physical zone range including holes and that is why we need to check
> > > > > both for physical and logical holes (aka other nodes).
> > > > >
> > > > > The life would be so much easier if the whole thing would simply iterate
> > > > > over memblocks...
> > > >
> > > > The memblock iterating sounds a great idea. I tried with putting the
> > > > memblock iterating in the upper layer, memmap_init(), which is used for
> > > > boot mem only anyway. Do you think it's doable and OK? It yes, I can
> > > > work out a formal patch to make this simpler as you said. The draft code
> > > > is as below. Like this it uses the existing code and involves little change.
> > >
> > > Doing this would be a step in the right direction! I haven't checked the
> > > code very closely though. The below sounds way too simple to be truth I
> > > am afraid. First for_each_mem_pfn_range is available only for
> > > CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP (which is one of the reasons why I keep
> > > saying that I really hate that being conditional). Also I haven't really
> > > checked the deferred initialization path - I have a very vague
> > > recollection that it has been converted to the memblock api but I have
> > > happilly dropped all that memory.
> >
> > Thanks for your quick response and pointing out the rest suspect aspects,
> > I will investigate what you mentioned, see if they impact.
>
> I would like to check if we still move on with my patch to remove
> CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES and have another patch on top it?
I think we would like to replace CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES with
CONFIG_NUMA, and just let UMA return 0 as node id, as Michal replied in
another mail. Anyway, your patch 2~5 are still needed to sit on top of
the change of this new plan.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-03 7:09 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 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] mm: Enable CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES by default for NUMA Baoquan He
2020-03-30 17:51 ` 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 [this message]
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=20200403070904.GO2402@MiWiFi-R3L-srv \
--to=bhe@redhat.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=hoan@os.amperecomputing.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).