From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 599ECC19F2D for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id D09146B0071; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 01:43:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id CB7C58E0002; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 01:43:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B323E8E0001; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 01:43:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A238D6B0071 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 01:43:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin02.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84586140266 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:38 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79778962116.02.17CD8A6 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15BE04001D for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2794KPiw022113; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:24 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=5ML01rEQdxKrXfhJZ3nSqAy731kwFucqNO6kjqIfVZc=; b=QtE0xM6P9bPH/BfKV/eebyM8/8hOlRmdXyJD4N/apHHBdMTtBt2p2rMg9BeyzdZr2KSs RwOWJgjee6rXKF+z0oj9RH8Hk9/RmHeUtzObTH21EMG1/JVLQamR+krYS7io9krM4+fU KGqssYumQxWlqMaA8VOQ+s3BaG/85mxJZhyuKkeWEFaMrsVmKKYpTcxH4op0mvURmJHy JaBZo2Mlp9u/ufd3OwxXBVtGUPisewPp1dgWoYfe5k6gM+IWVY65Kpu0YIdrbpEvxbGu 4OrnnUId3nofGeUAgVU47OGa0y3R6X4iXSUc9Yy9ug2ZqnZa11fgig4j4kq15LqYIuGY yQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3hugfhj2df-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 Aug 2022 05:43:24 +0000 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2795UDNZ002492; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:24 GMT Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3hugfhj2ch-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 Aug 2022 05:43:23 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2795awwE029647; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:22 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3hsfx8u12x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 09 Aug 2022 05:43:21 +0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 2795hJ5p31457606 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:19 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A42AE04D; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5729DAE045; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:16 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.109.205.170] (unknown [9.109.205.170]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 05:43:16 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <51770b88-fbf1-52e7-6d40-666e1fcfb0f2@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:13:15 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 9/9] lib/nodemask: Optimize node_random for nodemask with single NUMA node Content-Language: en-US To: "Huang, Ying" Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Wei Xu , Yang Shi , Davidlohr Bueso , Tim C Chen , Michal Hocko , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Hesham Almatary , Dave Hansen , Jonathan Cameron , Alistair Popple , Dan Williams , Johannes Weiner , jvgediya.oss@gmail.com References: <20220808062601.836025-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20220808062601.836025-10-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <87fsi6glcd.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> From: Aneesh Kumar K V In-Reply-To: <87fsi6glcd.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: -Ly7tQrQtziRCvobwpwhL1cxPA9bNukI X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: QgdNn5Itlc-TUmkNblQoePq00WiWf8e2 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-08-08_14,2022-08-09_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2206140000 definitions=main-2208090023 ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1660023818; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=5ML01rEQdxKrXfhJZ3nSqAy731kwFucqNO6kjqIfVZc=; b=Zxxm1Khc24F4kgfEKMwUojxS2vKdjaRzQsBUuhaWSHCgaYrhFMNO/76Zw/UXS3ojYf0dtN E7LGPHHvXGn7KoxGByegQMcmWTwim855mckvmEFXRPegdhBwLM/3Q6E9LP3vu0w33rs7tr 61O1EadBBwjgZGIbmPDKesbu2RxgOiY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=QtE0xM6P; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.158.5 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1660023818; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=5kvnoWVmvlhVOXCIO4Ac56VmDq+lB5bYufxuCnmXp8LDjaMIkQmQzqjh9a/O5DqPv7IPVz w/V4oJ+4ig+OPViKRN6gNeEZP5wlT4jQEGfM5EnhNEBFOo0QceeYSiap532EvqsKMDXBbD FLxxXrF7W5dLsUYkDj+IXmtSb+h0MgI= Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=QtE0xM6P; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.158.5 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Stat-Signature: i693b5676rpyxry8mipfh71necmtmk1e X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 15BE04001D X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1660023817-549078 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 8/9/22 8:43 AM, Huang, Ying wrote: > "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes: > >> The most common case for certain node_random usage (demotion nodemask) is with >> nodemask weight 1. We can avoid calling get_random_init() in that case and >> always return the only node set in the nodemask. > > I think that this patch can sit between [5/9] and [6/9], just after it > is used. > >> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V >> --- >> lib/nodemask.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/lib/nodemask.c b/lib/nodemask.c >> index e22647f5181b..c91a6b0404a5 100644 >> --- a/lib/nodemask.c >> +++ b/lib/nodemask.c >> @@ -20,12 +20,21 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__next_node_in); >> */ >> int node_random(const nodemask_t *maskp) >> { >> - int w, bit = NUMA_NO_NODE; >> + int w, bit; >> >> w = nodes_weight(*maskp); >> - if (w) >> + switch (w) { >> + case 0: >> + bit = NUMA_NO_NODE; >> + break; >> + case 1: >> + bit = __first_node(maskp); > > Per my understanding, first_node() is the formal API and we should use > that? Just like we use nodes_weight() instead of __nodes_weight(). > updated. -aneesh