LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
To: zhenguo yao <yaozhenguo1@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: corbet@lwn.net, yaozhenguo@jd.com,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] hugetlbfs: Extend the definition of hugepages parameter to support node allocation
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 15:03:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c55f0be5-f68d-1a33-a9e4-5890a2887a15@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+WzARmsPT46ck17-96cJVWE-=QEK8QobRFnCnEcNxsd42zNTw@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/15/21 6:11 AM, zhenguo yao wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> 于2021年9月15日周三 上午11:50写道:
>>
>> On Thu,  9 Sep 2021 22:16:55 +0800 yaozhenguo <yaozhenguo1@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We can specify the number of hugepages to allocate at boot. But the
>>> hugepages is balanced in all nodes at present. In some scenarios,
>>> we only need hugepages in one node. For example: DPDK needs hugepages
>>> which are in the same node as NIC. if DPDK needs four hugepages of 1G
>>> size in node1 and system has 16 numa nodes. We must reserve 64 hugepages
>>> in kernel cmdline. But, only four hugepages are used. The others should
>>> be free after boot. If the system memory is low(for example: 64G), it will
>>> be an impossible task. So, Extending hugepages parameter to support
>>> specifying hugepages at a specific node.
>>> For example add following parameter:
>>>
>>> hugepagesz=1G hugepages=0:1,1:3
>>>
>>> It will allocate 1 hugepage in node0 and 3 hugepages in node1.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> @@ -2842,10 +2843,75 @@ static void __init gather_bootmem_prealloc(void)
>>>       }
>>>  }
>>>
>>> +static void __init hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages_onenode(struct hstate *h, int nid)
>>> +{
>>> +     unsigned long i;
>>> +     char buf[32];
>>> +
>>> +     for (i = 0; i < h->max_huge_pages_node[nid]; ++i) {
>>> +             if (hstate_is_gigantic(h)) {
>>> +                     struct huge_bootmem_page *m;
>>> +                     void *addr;
>>> +
>>> +                     addr = memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(
>>> +                                     huge_page_size(h), huge_page_size(h),
>>> +                                     0, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, nid);
>>> +                     if (!addr)
>>> +                             break;
>>> +                     m = addr;
>>> +                     BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(virt_to_phys(m), huge_page_size(h)));
>>
>> We try very hard to avoid adding BUG calls.  Is there any way in which
>> this code can emit a WARNing then permit the kernel to keep operating?
>>
> Maybe we can rewrite it as below:
>                         if (WARN(!IS_ALIGNED(virt_to_phys(m),
> huge_page_size(h)),
>                                 "HugeTLB: page addr:%p is not aligned\n", m))
>                                 break;
> @Mike,  Do you think it's OK?

Sorry, I have not yet reviewed the latest version of this patch.
Quick thought on this question.

The required alignment passed to memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw() is
huge_page_size(h).  Therefore, we know the virtual address m is
huge_page_size(h) aligned.  The BUG is just checking to make sure
the physical address associated with the virtual address is aligned
the same.  I really do not see how this could not be the case.
In fact, the memblock allocator finds a physical address with the
required alignment and then returns phys_to_virt(alloc).
Someone please correct me if I am wrong.  Otherwise, we can drop
the BUG.
Adding Mike Rapport on Cc:

This allocation code and the associated BUG was copied from
__alloc_bootmem_huge_page().  The BUG was added 12 years ago before
the memblock allocator existed and we were using the bootmem allocator.
If there is no need for a BUG in hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages_onenode,
there is no need for one in __alloc_bootmem_huge_page.
-- 
Mike Kravetz

  reply	other threads:[~2021-09-15 22:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-09 14:16 yaozhenguo
2021-09-15  3:50 ` Andrew Morton
2021-09-15 13:11   ` zhenguo yao
2021-09-15 22:03     ` Mike Kravetz [this message]
2021-09-15 22:05       ` Mike Kravetz
2021-09-17 13:59         ` Mike Rapoport
2021-09-15 22:38       ` Mike Kravetz

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=c55f0be5-f68d-1a33-a9e4-5890a2887a15@oracle.com \
    --to=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=corbet@lwn.net \
    --cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yaozhenguo1@gmail.com \
    --cc=yaozhenguo@jd.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v4] hugetlbfs: Extend the definition of hugepages parameter to support node allocation' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).