Hi Elena,
Thank you very much for your quick reply! numa_set_strict(1) and numa_set_strict(0) both result in the wrong output. I did not change the default policy.
numa_get_membind returns 1 for all nodes before and after numa_run_on_node.
numa_get_interleave_mask returns 0 for all nodes.
numa_get_run_node_mask is all 1s before and 0010 after numa_run_on_node.
The machine config (the CPUs are all Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-4657L v2 @ 2.40GHz):
$ numactl --hardware
available: 4 nodes (0-3)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
node 0 size: 262093 MB
node 0 free: 966 MB
node 1 cpus: 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71
node 1 size: 262144 MB
node 1 free: 82 MB
node 2 cpus: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83
node 2 size: 262144 MB
node 2 free: 102 MB
node 3 cpus: 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
node 3 size: 262144 MB
node 3 free: 113 MB
node distances:
node 0 1 2 3
0: 10 20 30 20
1: 20 10 20 30
2: 30 20 10 20
3: 20 30 20 10
Thanks again,
Andres
> On 22 Oct 2014, at 06:12, Elena Ufimtseva <ufimtseva@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Andres Nötzli <noetzli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I am experiencing a weird problem. When using numa_alloc_onnode repeatedly to allocate memory, it does not allocate memory on the node passed as an argument.
>>
>> Sample code:
>> #include <numa.h>
>> #include <numaif.h>
>> #include <iostream>
>> using namespace std;
>>
>> void find_memory_node_for_addr(void* ptr) {
>> int numa_node = -1;
>> if(get_mempolicy(&numa_node, NULL, 0, ptr, MPOL_F_NODE | MPOL_F_ADDR) < 0)
>> cout << "WARNING: get_mempolicy failed" << endl;
>> cout << numa_node << endl;
>> }
>>
>> int main() {
>> int64_t* x;
>> int64_t n = 5000;
>> //numa_set_preferred(1);
>>
>> numa_run_on_node(2);
>> for(int i = 0; i < 20; i++) {
>> size_t s = n * sizeof(int64_t);
>> x = (int64_t*)numa_alloc_onnode(s, 1);
>> for(int j = 0; j < n; j++)
>> x[j] = j + i;
>> find_memory_node_for_addr(x);
>> }
>>
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> Output:
>> 1
>> 1
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>> 1
>> 2
>>
>> When uncommenting the line "numa_set_preferred(1);”, the output is all 1s as expected. Am I doing something wrong? Have you seen similar issues?
>>
>> I am running Ubuntu 12.04.5 LTS:
>> $ cat /proc/version
>> Linux version 3.2.0-29-generic (buildd@allspice) (gcc version 4.6.3 (Ubuntu/Linaro 4.6.3-1ubuntu5) ) #46-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jul 27 17:03:23 UTC 2012
>>
>> I am using libnuma 2.0.10 but I’ve had the same problem with 2.0.8~rc3-1.
>>
>> Thank you very much,
>> Andres
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> Hi Andres
>
> Can you try to use strict policy by calling numa_set_strict?
>
> If you comment out setting the preferred node, the default policy is
> in action (I assume you did no change it, not for the process, not
> system wide) which is preferred also.
> But here you set preferred to a specific node and manual says, the
> default for process is to allocate on the node it runs.
> So I wonder what is the cpu affinity for this process looks like...
> Also maybe just to confirm you can check the policy from within your
> running code?
>
> Can you also post the machine NUMA config?
>
> --
> Elena
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
