Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] padata: dispatch works on different nodes

[Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>]

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:04:17PM +0800, Gang Li wrote:
> When a group of tasks that access different nodes are scheduled on the
> same node, they may encounter bandwidth bottlenecks and access latency.
> 
> Thus, numa_aware flag is introduced here, allowing tasks to be
> distributed across different nodes to fully utilize the advantage of
> multi-node systems.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Gang Li <ligang.bdlg@bytedance.com>
> Tested-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
> Reviewed-by: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/padata.h |  2 ++
>  kernel/padata.c        | 14 ++++++++++++--
>  mm/mm_init.c           |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/padata.h b/include/linux/padata.h
> index 495b16b6b4d72..8f418711351bc 100644
> --- a/include/linux/padata.h
> +++ b/include/linux/padata.h
> @@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ struct padata_shell {
>   *             appropriate for one worker thread to do at once.
>   * @max_threads: Max threads to use for the job, actual number may be less
>   *               depending on task size and minimum chunk size.
> + * @numa_aware: Distribute jobs to different nodes with CPU in a round robin fashion.

numa_interleave seems more descriptive.

>   */
>  struct padata_mt_job {
>  	void (*thread_fn)(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, void *arg);
> @@ -146,6 +147,7 @@ struct padata_mt_job {
>  	unsigned long		align;
>  	unsigned long		min_chunk;
>  	int			max_threads;
> +	bool			numa_aware;
>  };
>  
>  /**
> diff --git a/kernel/padata.c b/kernel/padata.c
> index 179fb1518070c..e3f639ff16707 100644
> --- a/kernel/padata.c
> +++ b/kernel/padata.c
> @@ -485,7 +485,8 @@ void __init padata_do_multithreaded(struct padata_mt_job *job)
>  	struct padata_work my_work, *pw;
>  	struct padata_mt_job_state ps;
>  	LIST_HEAD(works);
> -	int nworks;
> +	int nworks, nid;
> +	static atomic_t last_used_nid __initdata;

nit, move last_used_nid up so it's below load_balance_factor to keep
that nice tree shape

>  
>  	if (job->size == 0)
>  		return;
> @@ -517,7 +518,16 @@ void __init padata_do_multithreaded(struct padata_mt_job *job)
>  	ps.chunk_size = roundup(ps.chunk_size, job->align);
>  
>  	list_for_each_entry(pw, &works, pw_list)
> -		queue_work(system_unbound_wq, &pw->pw_work);
> +		if (job->numa_aware) {
> +			int old_node = atomic_read(&last_used_nid);
> +
> +			do {
> +				nid = next_node_in(old_node, node_states[N_CPU]);
> +			} while (!atomic_try_cmpxchg(&last_used_nid, &old_node, nid));

There aren't concurrent NUMA-aware _do_multithreaded calls now, so an
atomic per work seems like an unnecessary expense for guarding against
possible uneven thread distribution in the future.  Non-atomic access
instead?

> +			queue_work_node(nid, system_unbound_wq, &pw->pw_work);
> +		} else {
> +			queue_work(system_unbound_wq, &pw->pw_work);
> +		}
>  
>  	/* Use the current thread, which saves starting a workqueue worker. */
>  	padata_work_init(&my_work, padata_mt_helper, &ps, PADATA_WORK_ONSTACK);
> diff --git a/mm/mm_init.c b/mm/mm_init.c
> index 2c19f5515e36c..549e76af8f82a 100644
> --- a/mm/mm_init.c
> +++ b/mm/mm_init.c
> @@ -2231,6 +2231,7 @@ static int __init deferred_init_memmap(void *data)
>  			.align       = PAGES_PER_SECTION,
>  			.min_chunk   = PAGES_PER_SECTION,
>  			.max_threads = max_threads,
> +			.numa_aware  = false,
>  		};
>  
>  		padata_do_multithreaded(&job);
> -- 
> 2.20.1
>