Re: [Patch V3 9/9] mm, x86: Enable memoryless node support to better support CPU/memory hotplug

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Hi Liu,

On 08/17/2015 11:19 AM, Jiang Liu wrote:
......
diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig
index b3a1a5d77d92..5d7ad70ace0d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/Kconfig
+++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig
@@ -2069,6 +2069,9 @@ config USE_PERCPU_NUMA_NODE_ID
  	def_bool y
  	depends on NUMA
+config HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES
+	def_bool NUMA
+
  config ARCH_ENABLE_SPLIT_PMD_PTLOCK
  	def_bool y
  	depends on X86_64 || X86_PAE
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
index 07930e1d2fe9..3403f1f0f28d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/acpi/boot.c
@@ -711,6 +711,7 @@ static void acpi_map_cpu2node(acpi_handle handle, int cpu, int physid)
  		}
  		set_apicid_to_node(physid, nid);
  		numa_set_node(cpu, nid);
+		set_cpu_numa_mem(cpu, local_memory_node(nid));
  	}
  #endif
  }
@@ -743,9 +744,10 @@ int acpi_unmap_cpu(int cpu)
  {
  #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_NUMA
  	set_apicid_to_node(per_cpu(x86_cpu_to_apicid, cpu), NUMA_NO_NODE);
+	set_cpu_numa_mem(cpu, NUMA_NO_NODE);
  #endif
- per_cpu(x86_cpu_to_apicid, cpu) = -1;
+	per_cpu(x86_cpu_to_apicid, cpu) = BAD_APICID;
  	set_cpu_present(cpu, false);
  	num_processors--;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
index b1f3ed9c7a9e..aeec91ac6fd4 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c
@@ -162,6 +162,8 @@ static void smp_callin(void)
  	 */
  	phys_id = read_apic_id();
+ set_numa_mem(local_memory_node(cpu_to_node(cpuid)));
+
  	/*
  	 * the boot CPU has finished the init stage and is spinning
  	 * on callin_map until we finish. We are free to set up this
diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index 08860bdf5744..f2a4e23bd14d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
int __initdata numa_off;
  nodemask_t numa_nodes_parsed __initdata;
+static nodemask_t numa_nodes_empty __initdata;
struct pglist_data *node_data[MAX_NUMNODES] __read_mostly;
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(node_data);
@@ -560,17 +561,16 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
  			end = max(mi->blk[i].end, end);
  		}
- if (start >= end)
-			continue;
-
  		/*
  		 * Don't confuse VM with a node that doesn't have the
  		 * minimum amount of memory:
  		 */
-		if (end && (end - start) < NODE_MIN_SIZE)
-			continue;
-
-		alloc_node_data(nid);
+		if (start < end && (end - start) >= NODE_MIN_SIZE) {
+			alloc_node_data(nid);
+		} else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES)) {
+			alloc_node_data(nid);
+			node_set(nid, numa_nodes_empty);

Seeing from here, I think numa_nodes_empty represents all memory-less nodes.
So, since we still have cpu-less nodes out there, shall we rename it to
numa_nodes_memoryless or something similar ?

And BTW, does x86 support cpu-less node after these patches ?

Since I don't have any memory-less or cpu-less node on my box, I cannot tell it clearly. A node is brought online when is has memory in original kernel. So I think it is supported.

+		}
  	}
/* Dump memblock with node info and return. */
@@ -587,14 +587,18 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
   */
  static void __init numa_init_array(void)
  {
-	int rr, i;
+	int i, rr = MAX_NUMNODES;
- rr = first_node(node_online_map);
  	for (i = 0; i < nr_cpu_ids; i++) {
+		/* Search for an onlined node with memory */
+		do {
+			if (rr != MAX_NUMNODES)
+				rr = next_node(rr, node_online_map);
+			if (rr == MAX_NUMNODES)
+				rr = first_node(node_online_map);
+		} while (node_isset(rr, numa_nodes_empty));
+
  		numa_set_node(i, rr);
-		rr = next_node(rr, node_online_map);
-		if (rr == MAX_NUMNODES)
-			rr = first_node(node_online_map);
  	}
  }
@@ -696,9 +700,12 @@ static __init int find_near_online_node(int node)
  {
  	int n, val;
  	int min_val = INT_MAX;
-	int best_node = -1;
+	int best_node = NUMA_NO_NODE;
for_each_online_node(n) {
+		if (node_isset(n, numa_nodes_empty))
+			continue;
+
  		val = node_distance(node, n);
if (val < min_val) {
@@ -739,6 +746,22 @@ void __init init_cpu_to_node(void)
  		if (!node_online(node))
  			node = find_near_online_node(node);
  		numa_set_node(cpu, node);

So, CPUs are still mapped to online near node, right ?

I was expecting CPUs on a memory-less node are mapped to the node they
belong to. If so, the current memory allocator may fail because they assume
each online node has memory. I was trying to do this in my patch.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/7/205

Of course, my patch is not to support memory-less node, just run into this problem.

+		if (node_spanned_pages(node))
+			set_cpu_numa_mem(cpu, node);
+		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES))
+			node_clear(node, numa_nodes_empty);

And since we are supporting memory-less node, it's better to provide a
for_each_memoryless_node() wrapper.

+	}
+
+	/* Destroy empty nodes */
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES)) {
+		int nid;
+		const size_t nd_size = roundup(sizeof(pg_data_t), PAGE_SIZE);
+
+		for_each_node_mask(nid, numa_nodes_empty) {
+			node_set_offline(nid);
+			memblock_free(__pa(node_data[nid]), nd_size);
+			node_data[nid] = NULL;

So, memory-less nodes are set offline finally. It's a little different from what I thought. I was expecting that both memory-less and cpu-less nodes could also be online after
this patch, which would be very helpful to me.

But actually, they are just exist temporarily, used to set _numa_mem_ so that cpu_to_mem()
is able to work, right ?

Thanks.

+		}
  	}
  }

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]