From: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
To: Gang Li <gang.li@linux.dev>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/7] hugetlb: parallelize hugetlb page init on boot
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 17:52:53 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5c30a825-b588-e3a9-83db-f8eef4cb9012@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240102131249.76622-1-gang.li@linux.dev>
On Tue, 2 Jan 2024, Gang Li wrote:
> Hi all, hugetlb init parallelization has now been updated to v3.
>
> This series is tested on next-20240102 and can not be applied to v6.7-rc8.
>
> Update Summary:
> - Select CONFIG_PADATA as we use padata_do_multithreaded
> - Fix a race condition in h->next_nid_to_alloc
> - Fix local variable initialization issues
> - Remove RFC tag
>
> Thanks to the testing by David Rientjes, we now know that this patch reduce
> hugetlb 1G initialization time from 77s to 18.3s on a 12T machine[4].
>
> # Introduction
> Hugetlb initialization during boot takes up a considerable amount of time.
> For instance, on a 2TB system, initializing 1,800 1GB huge pages takes 1-2
> seconds out of 10 seconds. Initializing 11,776 1GB pages on a 12TB Intel
> host takes more than 1 minute[1]. This is a noteworthy figure.
>
> Inspired by [2] and [3], hugetlb initialization can also be accelerated
> through parallelization. Kernel already has infrastructure like
> padata_do_multithreaded, this patch uses it to achieve effective results
> by minimal modifications.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/783f8bac-55b8-5b95-eb6a-11a583675000@google.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20200527173608.2885243-1-daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230906112605.2286994-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com/
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/76becfc1-e609-e3e8-2966-4053143170b6@google.com/
>
> # Test result
> test no patch(ms) patched(ms) saved
> ------------------- -------------- ------------- --------
> 256c2t(4 node) 1G 4745 2024 57.34%
> 128c1t(2 node) 1G 3358 1712 49.02%
> 12t 1G 77000 18300 76.23%
>
> 256c2t(4 node) 2M 3336 1051 68.52%
> 128c1t(2 node) 2M 1943 716 63.15%
>
I tested 1GB hugetlb on a smaller AMD host with the following:
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -3301,7 +3301,7 @@ int alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h, int nid)
int __alloc_bootmem_huge_page(struct hstate *h, int nid)
{
struct huge_bootmem_page *m = NULL; /* initialize for clang */
- int nr_nodes, node;
+ int nr_nodes, node = nid;
/* do node specific alloc */
if (nid != NUMA_NO_NODE) {
After the build error is fixed, feel free to add:
Tested-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
to each patch. I think Andrew will probably take a build fix up as a
delta on top of patch 4 rather than sending a whole new series unless
there is other feedback that you receive.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-03 1:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-02 13:12 Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 1/7] hugetlb: code clean for hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages Gang Li
2024-01-10 10:19 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-11 3:30 ` Gang Li
2024-01-10 21:55 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-11 3:34 ` Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 2/7] hugetlb: split hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages Gang Li
2024-01-10 23:12 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-11 3:44 ` Gang Li
2024-01-16 7:02 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-16 8:09 ` Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 3/7] padata: dispatch works on different nodes Gang Li
2024-01-11 17:50 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-12 7:09 ` Gang Li
2024-01-12 18:27 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-15 8:57 ` Gang Li
2024-01-17 22:14 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-18 6:15 ` Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 4/7] hugetlb: pass *next_nid_to_alloc directly to for_each_node_mask_to_alloc Gang Li
2024-01-03 1:32 ` David Rientjes
2024-01-03 2:22 ` Gang Li
2024-01-03 2:36 ` David Rientjes
2024-01-11 22:21 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-12 8:07 ` Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 5/7] hugetlb: have CONFIG_HUGETLBFS select CONFIG_PADATA Gang Li
2024-01-11 22:49 ` Tim Chen
2024-01-16 9:26 ` Muchun Song
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 6/7] hugetlb: parallelize 2M hugetlb allocation and initialization Gang Li
2024-01-02 13:12 ` [PATCH v3 7/7] hugetlb: parallelize 1G hugetlb initialization Gang Li
2024-01-03 1:52 ` David Rientjes [this message]
2024-01-03 2:20 ` [PATCH v3 0/7] hugetlb: parallelize hugetlb page init on boot Gang Li
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=5c30a825-b588-e3a9-83db-f8eef4cb9012@google.com \
--to=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gang.li@linux.dev \
--cc=ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox