On 24.11.23 20:44, David Rientjes wrote:
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 23.11.23 14:30, Gang Li wrote:
From: Gang Li <ligang.bdlg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Inspired by these patches [1][2], this series aims to speed up the
initialization of hugetlb during the boot process through
parallelization.
It is particularly effective in large systems. On a machine equipped
with 1TB of memory and two NUMA nodes, the time for hugetlb
initialization was reduced from 2 seconds to 1 second.
Sorry to say, but why is that a scenario worth adding complexity for /
optimizing for? You don't cover that, so there is a clear lack in the
motivation.
2 vs. 1 second on a 1 TiB system is usually really just noise.
The cost will continue to grow over time, so I presume that Gang is trying
to get out in front of the issue even though it may not be a large savings
today.
Running single boot tests, with the latest upstream kernel, allocating
1,440 1GB hugetlb pages on a 1.5TB AMD host appears to take 1.47s.
But allocating 11,776 1GB hugetlb pages on a 12TB Intel host takes 65.2s
today with the current implementation.
And there, the 65.2s won't be noise because that 12TB system is up by a
snap of a finger? :)
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
