On 07.12.21 18:17, Alexey Makhalov wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 7, 2021, at 9:13 AM, David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On 07.12.21 18:02, Alexey Makhalov wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Dec 7, 2021, at 8:36 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue 07-12-21 17:27:29, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> So your proposal is to drop set_node_online from the patch and add it as
>>>>> a separate one which handles
>>>>> - sysfs part (i.e. do not register a node which doesn't span a
>>>>> physical address space)
>>>>> - hotplug side of (drop the pgd allocation, register node lazily
>>>>> when a first memblocks are registered)
>>>>
>>>> In other words, the first stage
>>>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>> index c5952749ad40..f9024ba09c53 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>> @@ -6382,7 +6382,11 @@ static void __build_all_zonelists(void *data)
>>>> if (self && !node_online(self->node_id)) {
>>>> build_zonelists(self);
>>>> } else {
>>>> - for_each_online_node(nid) {
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * All possible nodes have pgdat preallocated
>>>> + * free_area_init
>>>> + */
>>>> + for_each_node(nid) {
>>>> pg_data_t *pgdat = NODE_DATA(nid);
>>>>
>>>> build_zonelists(pgdat);
>>>
>>> Will it blow up memory usage for the nodes which might never be onlined?
>>> I prefer the idea of init on demand.
>>>
>>> Even now there is an existing problem.
>>> In my experiments, I observed _huge_ memory consumption increase by increasing number
>>> of possible numa nodes. I’m going to report it in separate mail thread.
>>
>> I already raised that PPC might be problematic in that regard. Which
>> architecture / setup do you have in mind that can have a lot of possible
>> nodes?
>>
> It is x86_64 VMware VM, not the regular one, but specially configured (1 vCPU per node,
> with hot-plug support, 128 possible nodes)
I thought the pgdat would be smaller but I just gave it a test:
On my system, pgdata_t is 173824 bytes. So 128 nodes would correspond to
21 MiB, which is indeed a lot. I assume it's due to "struct zonelist",
which has MAX_ZONES_PER_ZONELIST == (MAX_NUMNODES * MAX_NR_ZONES) zone
references ...
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
