From: Donet Tom <donettom@linux.ibm.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Ritesh Harjani <ritesh.list@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Nilay Shroff <nilay@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/5] drivers/base/node: Optimize memory block registration to reduce boot time
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 18:57:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <de209828-d237-4912-905b-8c7de7e5734d@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <96f7d3a2-2d85-442c-a9f7-e558d4a2ba06@redhat.com>
On 6/4/25 3:08 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.05.25 19:18, Donet Tom wrote:
>> During node device initialization, `memory blocks` are registered under
>> each NUMA node. The `memory blocks` to be registered are identified
>> using
>> the node’s start and end PFNs, which are obtained from the node's
>> pg_data
>>
>> However, not all PFNs within this range necessarily belong to the same
>> node—some may belong to other nodes. Additionally, due to the
>> discontiguous nature of physical memory, certain sections within a
>> `memory block` may be absent.
>>
>> As a result, `memory blocks` that fall between a node’s start and end
>> PFNs may span across multiple nodes, and some sections within those
>> blocks
>> may be missing. `Memory blocks` have a fixed size, which is architecture
>> dependent.
>>
>> Due to these considerations, the memory block registration is currently
>> performed as follows:
>>
>> for_each_online_node(nid):
>> start_pfn = pgdat->node_start_pfn;
>> end_pfn = pgdat->node_start_pfn + node_spanned_pages;
>> for_each_memory_block_between(PFN_PHYS(start_pfn),
>> PFN_PHYS(end_pfn))
>> mem_blk = memory_block_id(pfn_to_section_nr(pfn));
>> pfn_mb_start=section_nr_to_pfn(mem_blk->start_section_nr)
>> pfn_mb_end = pfn_start + memory_block_pfns - 1
>> for (pfn = pfn_mb_start; pfn < pfn_mb_end; pfn++):
>> if (get_nid_for_pfn(pfn) != nid):
>> continue;
>> else
>> do_register_memory_block_under_node(nid, mem_blk,
>> MEMINIT_EARLY);
>>
>> Here, we derive the start and end PFNs from the node's pg_data, then
>> determine the memory blocks that may belong to the node. For each
>> `memory block` in this range, we inspect all PFNs it contains and check
>> their associated NUMA node ID. If a PFN within the block matches the
>> current node, the memory block is registered under that node.
>>
>> If CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT is enabled, get_nid_for_pfn()
>> performs
>> a binary search in the `memblock regions` to determine the NUMA node ID
>> for a given PFN. If it is not enabled, the node ID is retrieved directly
>> from the struct page.
>>
>> On large systems, this process can become time-consuming, especially
>> since
>> we iterate over each `memory block` and all PFNs within it until a
>> match is
>> found. When CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT is enabled, the additional
>> overhead of the binary search increases the execution time
>> significantly,
>> potentially leading to soft lockups during boot.
>>
>> In this patch, we iterate over `memblock region` to identify the
>> `memory blocks` that belong to the current NUMA node. `memblock regions`
>> are contiguous memory ranges, each associated with a single NUMA
>> node, and
>> they do not span across multiple nodes.
>>
>> for_each_memory_region(r): // r => region
>> if (!node_online(r->nid)):
>> continue;
>> else
>> for_each_memory_block_between(r->base, r->base + r->size - 1):
>> do_register_memory_block_under_node(r->nid, mem_blk,
>> MEMINIT_EARLY);
>>
>> We iterate over all memblock regions, and if the node associated with
>> the
>> region is online, we calculate the start and end memory blocks based
>> on the
>> region's start and end PFNs. We then register all the memory blocks
>> within
>> that range under the region node.
>>
>> Test Results on My system with 32TB RAM
>> =======================================
>> 1. Boot time with CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT enabled.
>>
>> Without this patch
>> ------------------
>> Startup finished in 1min 16.528s (kernel)
>>
>> With this patch
>> ---------------
>> Startup finished in 17.236s (kernel) - 78% Improvement
>>
>> 2. Boot time with CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT disabled.
>>
>> Without this patch
>> ------------------
>> Startup finished in 28.320s (kernel)
>>
>> With this patch
>> ---------------
>> Startup finished in 15.621s (kernel) - 46% Improvement
>>
>> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> Acked-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
>> Acked-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Donet Tom <donettom@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>> ---
>
> [...]
>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
>> void memory_block_add_nid(struct memory_block *mem, int nid,
>> enum meminit_context context);
>> @@ -188,5 +206,4 @@ void memory_block_add_nid(struct memory_block
>> *mem, int nid,
>> * can sleep.
>> */
>> extern struct mutex text_mutex;
>> -
>
> ^ Nit: unrelated change?
Thank you David
I’ll make the change and send the next revision.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-04 13:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-28 17:18 Donet Tom
2025-05-28 17:18 ` [PATCH v7 2/5] drivers/base/node: remove register_mem_block_under_node_early() Donet Tom
2025-05-28 17:18 ` [PATCH v7 3/5] drivers/base/node: Remove register_memory_blocks_under_node() function call from register_one_node Donet Tom
2025-05-28 17:18 ` [PATCH v7 4/5] drivers/base/node: Rename register_memory_blocks_under_node() and remove context argument Donet Tom
2025-05-28 17:18 ` [PATCH v7 5/5] drivers/base/node: Rename __register_one_node() to register_one_node() Donet Tom
2025-06-04 3:07 ` [PATCH v7 1/5] drivers/base/node: Optimize memory block registration to reduce boot time Andrew Morton
2025-06-04 9:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 13:17 ` Donet Tom
2025-06-04 13:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 15:57 ` Donet Tom
2025-06-04 13:25 ` Donet Tom
2025-06-04 9:38 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 13:27 ` Donet Tom [this message]
2025-06-04 13:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-09 14:03 ` [Fixup PATCH] drivers/base/node: Restored the removed extra line Donet Tom
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=de209828-d237-4912-905b-8c7de7e5734d@linux.ibm.com \
--to=donettom@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nilay@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=yury.norov@gmail.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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