在 2021/10/14 5:46, Shakeel Butt 写道:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 5:03 AM Chen Wandun <chenwandun@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Eric Dumazet reported a strange numa spreading info in [1], and found
commit 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings") introduced
this issue [2].
Dig into the difference before and after this patch, page allocation has
some difference:
before:
alloc_large_system_hash
__vmalloc
__vmalloc_node(..., NUMA_NO_NODE, ...)
__vmalloc_node_range
__vmalloc_area_node
alloc_page /* because NUMA_NO_NODE, so choose alloc_page branch */
alloc_pages_current
alloc_page_interleave /* can be proved by print policy mode */
after:
alloc_large_system_hash
__vmalloc
__vmalloc_node(..., NUMA_NO_NODE, ...)
__vmalloc_node_range
__vmalloc_area_node
alloc_pages_node /* choose nid by nuam_mem_id() */
__alloc_pages_node(nid, ....)
So after commit 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings"),
it will allocate memory in current node instead of interleaving allocate
memory.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CANn89iL6AAyWhfxdHO+jaT075iOa3XcYn9k6JJc7JR2XYn6k_Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CANn89iLofTR=AK-QOZY87RdUZENCZUT4O6a0hvhu3_EwRMerOg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Fixes: 121e6f3258fe ("mm/vmalloc: hugepage vmalloc mappings")
Reported-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/vmalloc.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index f884706c5280..48e717626e94 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -2823,6 +2823,8 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
unsigned int order, unsigned int nr_pages, struct page **pages)
{
unsigned int nr_allocated = 0;
+ struct page *page;
+ int i;
/*
* For order-0 pages we make use of bulk allocator, if
@@ -2833,6 +2835,7 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
if (!order) {
Can you please replace the above with if (!order && nid != NUMA_NO_NODE)?
while (nr_allocated < nr_pages) {
unsigned int nr, nr_pages_request;
+ page = NULL;
/*
* A maximum allowed request is hard-coded and is 100
@@ -2842,9 +2845,23 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
*/
nr_pages_request = min(100U, nr_pages - nr_allocated);
Undo the following change in this if block.
Yes, It seem like more simpler as you suggested, But it still have
performance regression, I plan to change the following to consider
both mempolcy and alloc_pages_bulk.
Thanks,
Wandun
- nr = alloc_pages_bulk_array_node(gfp, nid,
- nr_pages_request, pages + nr_allocated);
-
+ if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
+ for (i = 0; i < nr_pages_request; i++) {
+ page = alloc_page(gfp);
+ if (page)
+ pages[nr_allocated + i] = page;
+ else {
+ nr = i;
+ break;
+ }
+ }
+ if (i >= nr_pages_request)
+ nr = nr_pages_request;
+ } else {
+ nr = alloc_pages_bulk_array_node(gfp, nid,
+ nr_pages_request,
+ pages + nr_allocated);
+ }
nr_allocated += nr;
cond_resched();
@@ -2863,11 +2880,13 @@ vm_area_alloc_pages(gfp_t gfp, int nid,
Put the following line under "else if (order)"
gfp |= __GFP_COMP;
/* High-order pages or fallback path if "bulk" fails. */
- while (nr_allocated < nr_pages) {
Keep the following declarations inside the while loop.
- struct page *page;
- int i;
- page = alloc_pages_node(nid, gfp, order);
+ page = NULL;
+ while (nr_allocated < nr_pages) {
+ if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
+ page = alloc_pages(gfp, order);
+ else
+ page = alloc_pages_node(nid, gfp, order);
if (unlikely(!page))
break;
--
2.25.1
.
