From: Nishanth Aravamudan Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2014 23:15:12 +0000 (-0700) Subject: powerpc: reorder per-cpu NUMA information's initialization X-Git-Url: https://git.karo-electronics.de/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=2fabf084b6ad;p=linux-beck.git powerpc: reorder per-cpu NUMA information's initialization There is an issue currently where NUMA information is used on powerpc (and possibly ia64) before it has been read from the device-tree, which leads to large slab consumption with CONFIG_SLUB and memoryless nodes. NUMA powerpc non-boot CPU's cpu_to_node/cpu_to_mem is only accurate after start_secondary(), similar to ia64, which is invoked via smp_init(). Commit 6ee0578b4daae ("workqueue: mark init_workqueues() as early_initcall()") made init_workqueues() be invoked via do_pre_smp_initcalls(), which is obviously before the secondary processors are online. Additionally, the following commits changed init_workqueues() to use cpu_to_node to determine the node to use for kthread_create_on_node: bce903809ab3f ("workqueue: add wq_numa_tbl_len and wq_numa_possible_cpumask[]") f3f90ad469342 ("workqueue: determine NUMA node of workers accourding to the allowed cpumask") Therefore, when init_workqueues() runs, it sees all CPUs as being on Node 0. On LPARs or KVM guests where Node 0 is memoryless, this leads to a high number of slab deactivations (http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mm/msg67489.html). Fix this by initializing the powerpc-specific CPU<->node/local memory node mapping as early as possible, which on powerpc is do_init_bootmem(). Currently that function initializes the mapping for the boot CPU, but we extend it to setup the mapping for all possible CPUs. Then, in smp_prepare_cpus(), we can correspondingly set the per-cpu values for all possible CPUs. That ensures that before the early_initcalls run (and really as early as possible), the per-cpu NUMA mapping is accurate. While testing memoryless nodes on PowerKVM guests with a fix to the workqueue logic to use cpu_to_mem() instead of cpu_to_node(), with a guest topology of: available: 2 nodes (0-1) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 node 0 size: 0 MB node 0 free: 0 MB node 1 cpus: 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 node 1 size: 16336 MB node 1 free: 15329 MB node distances: node 0 1 0: 10 40 1: 40 10 the slab consumption decreases from Slab: 932416 kB SUnreclaim: 902336 kB to Slab: 395264 kB SUnreclaim: 359424 kB And we a corresponding increase in the slab efficiency from slab mem objs slabs used active active ------------------------------------------------------------ kmalloc-16384 337 MB 11.28% 100.00% task_struct 288 MB 9.93% 100.00% to slab mem objs slabs used active active ------------------------------------------------------------ kmalloc-16384 37 MB 100.00% 100.00% task_struct 31 MB 100.00% 100.00% Powerpc didn't support memoryless nodes until recently (64bb80d87f01 "powerpc/numa: Enable CONFIG_HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES" and 8c272261194d "powerpc/numa: Enable USE_PERCPU_NUMA_NODE_ID"). Those commits also helped improve memory consumption with these kind of environments. Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt --- diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c index 1007fb802e6b..a0738af4aba6 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c @@ -376,6 +376,11 @@ void __init smp_prepare_cpus(unsigned int max_cpus) GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); zalloc_cpumask_var_node(&per_cpu(cpu_core_map, cpu), GFP_KERNEL, cpu_to_node(cpu)); + /* + * numa_node_id() works after this. + */ + set_cpu_numa_node(cpu, numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu]); + set_cpu_numa_mem(cpu, local_memory_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu])); } cpumask_set_cpu(boot_cpuid, cpu_sibling_mask(boot_cpuid)); @@ -723,12 +728,6 @@ void start_secondary(void *unused) } traverse_core_siblings(cpu, true); - /* - * numa_node_id() works after this. - */ - set_numa_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu]); - set_numa_mem(local_memory_node(numa_cpu_lookup_table[cpu])); - smp_wmb(); notify_cpu_starting(cpu); set_cpu_online(cpu, true); diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c index d3e9a78eaed3..d7737a542fd7 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c @@ -1049,7 +1049,7 @@ static void __init mark_reserved_regions_for_nid(int nid) void __init do_init_bootmem(void) { - int nid; + int nid, cpu; min_low_pfn = 0; max_low_pfn = memblock_end_of_DRAM() >> PAGE_SHIFT; @@ -1122,8 +1122,15 @@ void __init do_init_bootmem(void) reset_numa_cpu_lookup_table(); register_cpu_notifier(&ppc64_numa_nb); - cpu_numa_callback(&ppc64_numa_nb, CPU_UP_PREPARE, - (void *)(unsigned long)boot_cpuid); + /* + * We need the numa_cpu_lookup_table to be accurate for all CPUs, + * even before we online them, so that we can use cpu_to_{node,mem} + * early in boot, cf. smp_prepare_cpus(). + */ + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) { + cpu_numa_callback(&ppc64_numa_nb, CPU_UP_PREPARE, + (void *)(unsigned long)cpu); + } } void __init paging_init(void)