| Message ID | 20200817103238.158133-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2,1/3] powerpc/numa: Introduce logical numa id | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | success | Successfully applied on branch powerpc/merge (f04b169e953c4db1a3a3c1d23eea09c726f01ee5) |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/checkpatch | warning | total: 1 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 124 lines checked |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/needsstable | success | Patch has no Fixes tags |
* Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 16:02:36]: > We use ibm,associativity and ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays to derive the numa > node numbers. These device tree properties are firmware indicated grouping of > resources based on their hierarchy in the platform. These numbers (group id) are > not sequential and hypervisor/firmware can follow different numbering schemes. > For ex: on powernv platforms, we group them in the below order. > > * - CCM node ID > * - HW card ID > * - HW module ID > * - Chip ID > * - Core ID > > Based on ibm,associativity-reference-points we use one of the above group ids as > Linux NUMA node id. (On PowerNV platform Chip ID is used). This results > in Linux reporting non-linear NUMA node id and which also results in Linux > reporting empty node 0 NUMA nodes. > > This can be resolved by mapping the firmware provided group id to a logical Linux > NUMA id. In this patch, we do this only for pseries platforms considering the > firmware group id is a virtualized entity and users would not have drawn any > conclusion based on the Linux Numa Node id. > > On PowerNV platform since we have historically mapped Chip ID as Linux NUMA node > id, we keep the existing Linux NUMA node id numbering. I still dont understand how you are going to handle numa distances. With your patch, have you tried dlpar add/remove on a sparsely noded machine?
On 8/17/20 4:29 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > * Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 16:02:36]: > >> We use ibm,associativity and ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays to derive the numa >> node numbers. These device tree properties are firmware indicated grouping of >> resources based on their hierarchy in the platform. These numbers (group id) are >> not sequential and hypervisor/firmware can follow different numbering schemes. >> For ex: on powernv platforms, we group them in the below order. >> >> * - CCM node ID >> * - HW card ID >> * - HW module ID >> * - Chip ID >> * - Core ID >> >> Based on ibm,associativity-reference-points we use one of the above group ids as >> Linux NUMA node id. (On PowerNV platform Chip ID is used). This results >> in Linux reporting non-linear NUMA node id and which also results in Linux >> reporting empty node 0 NUMA nodes. >> >> This can be resolved by mapping the firmware provided group id to a logical Linux >> NUMA id. In this patch, we do this only for pseries platforms considering the >> firmware group id is a virtualized entity and users would not have drawn any >> conclusion based on the Linux Numa Node id. >> >> On PowerNV platform since we have historically mapped Chip ID as Linux NUMA node >> id, we keep the existing Linux NUMA node id numbering. > > I still dont understand how you are going to handle numa distances. > With your patch, have you tried dlpar add/remove on a sparsely noded machine? > We follow the same steps when fetching distance information. Instead of using affinity domain id, we now use the mapped node id. The relevant hunk in the patch is + nid = affinity_domain_to_nid(&domain); if (nid > 0 && - of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { + of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { /* * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array */ I haven't tried dlpar add/remove. I don't have a setup to try that. Do you see a problem there? -aneesh
* Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 17:04:24]: > On 8/17/20 4:29 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > > * Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 16:02:36]: > > > > > We use ibm,associativity and ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays to derive the numa > > > node numbers. These device tree properties are firmware indicated grouping of > > > resources based on their hierarchy in the platform. These numbers (group id) are > > > not sequential and hypervisor/firmware can follow different numbering schemes. > > > For ex: on powernv platforms, we group them in the below order. > > > > > > * - CCM node ID > > > * - HW card ID > > > * - HW module ID > > > * - Chip ID > > > * - Core ID > > > > > > Based on ibm,associativity-reference-points we use one of the above group ids as > > > Linux NUMA node id. (On PowerNV platform Chip ID is used). This results > > > in Linux reporting non-linear NUMA node id and which also results in Linux > > > reporting empty node 0 NUMA nodes. > > > > > > This can be resolved by mapping the firmware provided group id to a logical Linux > > > NUMA id. In this patch, we do this only for pseries platforms considering the > > > firmware group id is a virtualized entity and users would not have drawn any > > > conclusion based on the Linux Numa Node id. > > > > > > On PowerNV platform since we have historically mapped Chip ID as Linux NUMA node > > > id, we keep the existing Linux NUMA node id numbering. > > > > I still dont understand how you are going to handle numa distances. > > With your patch, have you tried dlpar add/remove on a sparsely noded machine? > > > > We follow the same steps when fetching distance information. Instead of > using affinity domain id, we now use the mapped node id. The relevant hunk > in the patch is > > + nid = affinity_domain_to_nid(&domain); > > if (nid > 0 && > - of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { > + of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { > /* > * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array > */ > > I haven't tried dlpar add/remove. I don't have a setup to try that. Do you > see a problem there? > Yes, I think there can be 2 problems. 1. distance table may be filled with incorrect data. 2. numactl -H distance table shows symmetric data, the symmetric nature may be lost. > -aneesh > >
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > * Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 17:04:24]: > >> On 8/17/20 4:29 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: >> > * Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> [2020-08-17 16:02:36]: >> > >> > > We use ibm,associativity and ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays to derive the numa >> > > node numbers. These device tree properties are firmware indicated grouping of >> > > resources based on their hierarchy in the platform. These numbers (group id) are >> > > not sequential and hypervisor/firmware can follow different numbering schemes. >> > > For ex: on powernv platforms, we group them in the below order. >> > > >> > > * - CCM node ID >> > > * - HW card ID >> > > * - HW module ID >> > > * - Chip ID >> > > * - Core ID >> > > >> > > Based on ibm,associativity-reference-points we use one of the above group ids as >> > > Linux NUMA node id. (On PowerNV platform Chip ID is used). This results >> > > in Linux reporting non-linear NUMA node id and which also results in Linux >> > > reporting empty node 0 NUMA nodes. >> > > >> > > This can be resolved by mapping the firmware provided group id to a logical Linux >> > > NUMA id. In this patch, we do this only for pseries platforms considering the >> > > firmware group id is a virtualized entity and users would not have drawn any >> > > conclusion based on the Linux Numa Node id. >> > > >> > > On PowerNV platform since we have historically mapped Chip ID as Linux NUMA node >> > > id, we keep the existing Linux NUMA node id numbering. >> > >> > I still dont understand how you are going to handle numa distances. >> > With your patch, have you tried dlpar add/remove on a sparsely noded machine? >> > >> >> We follow the same steps when fetching distance information. Instead of >> using affinity domain id, we now use the mapped node id. The relevant hunk >> in the patch is >> >> + nid = affinity_domain_to_nid(&domain); >> >> if (nid > 0 && >> - of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { >> + of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { >> /* >> * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array >> */ >> >> I haven't tried dlpar add/remove. I don't have a setup to try that. Do you >> see a problem there? >> > > Yes, I think there can be 2 problems. > > 1. distance table may be filled with incorrect data. > 2. numactl -H distance table shows symmetric data, the symmetric nature may > be lost. > After discussing with srikar to understand these concern better, below are the conclusions. 1) There is no corruption of node distance. We do handle node distance correctly. But the numactl -H output can be such that we won't find the numa nodes with a higher number to be further away from node 0. ie. We can find output like below. node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 40 40 20 1: 40 10 40 40 2: 40 40 10 40 3: 20 40 40 10 Here node 3 is closer to node 0 Than node 1 and 2. I am not sure this is going to break any userspace. 2) We can find node number changing if we do a DLPAR add of memory/cpu and reboot. ie, we boot with resource domain id 4 and 6 and then later add resources from domain 5. In this above case, we will have node 0,1 and 2 mapping domain id 4, 6, 5. On reboot, we can map them such that node 0 -> 4 node 1 -> 5 node 2 -> 6 I guess this is still ok because we are running in a virtualized environment and node numbers to domain id are never guaranteed to be he same across reboot. -aneesh
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h index f0b6300e7dd3..7c18883cee9c 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h @@ -118,5 +118,10 @@ int get_physical_package_id(int cpu); #endif #endif +struct affinity_domain { + int id; +}; + +int affinity_domain_to_nid(struct affinity_domain *domain); #endif /* __KERNEL__ */ #endif /* _ASM_POWERPC_TOPOLOGY_H */ diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c index 1f61fa2148b5..d29f60e15777 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c @@ -221,26 +221,76 @@ static void initialize_distance_lookup_table(int nid, } } + +static int domain_id_map[MAX_NUMNODES] = {[0 ... MAX_NUMNODES - 1] = -1 }; + +static int __affinity_domain_to_nid(int domain_id, int max_nid) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < max_nid; i++) { + if (domain_id_map[i] == domain_id) + return i; + } + return NUMA_NO_NODE; +} + +int affinity_domain_to_nid(struct affinity_domain *domain) +{ + int nid, domain_id; + static int last_nid = 0; + static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(node_id_lock); + + domain_id = domain->id; + /* + * For PowerNV we don't change the node id. This helps to avoid + * confusion w.r.t the expected node ids. On pseries, node numbers + * are virtualized. Hence do logical node id for pseries. + */ + if (!firmware_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_LPAR)) + return domain_id; + + if (domain_id == -1) + return NUMA_NO_NODE; + + nid = __affinity_domain_to_nid(domain_id, last_nid); + if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) { + spin_lock(&node_id_lock); + /* recheck with lock held */ + nid = __affinity_domain_to_nid(domain_id, last_nid); + if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE && last_nid < MAX_NUMNODES) { + nid = last_nid++; + domain_id_map[nid] = domain_id; + } + spin_unlock(&node_id_lock); + } + + return nid; +} + /* * Returns nid in the range [0..nr_node_ids], or -1 if no useful NUMA * info is found. */ static int associativity_to_nid(const __be32 *associativity) { + struct affinity_domain domain = { .id = -1 }; int nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; if (!numa_enabled) goto out; if (of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= min_common_depth) - nid = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1); + domain.id = of_read_number(&associativity[min_common_depth], 1); /* POWER4 LPAR uses 0xffff as invalid node */ - if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= nr_node_ids) - nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; + if (domain.id == 0xffff) + domain.id = -1; + + nid = affinity_domain_to_nid(&domain); if (nid > 0 && - of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { + of_read_number(associativity, 1) >= distance_ref_points_depth) { /* * Skip the length field and send start of associativity array */ @@ -432,25 +482,27 @@ static int of_get_assoc_arrays(struct assoc_arrays *aa) */ static int of_drconf_to_nid_single(struct drmem_lmb *lmb) { + struct affinity_domain domain; struct assoc_arrays aa = { .arrays = NULL }; - int default_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; - int nid = default_nid; + int nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; int rc, index; if ((min_common_depth < 0) || !numa_enabled) - return default_nid; + return NUMA_NO_NODE; rc = of_get_assoc_arrays(&aa); if (rc) - return default_nid; + return NUMA_NO_NODE; if (min_common_depth <= aa.array_sz && !(lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_AI_INVALID) && lmb->aa_index < aa.n_arrays) { index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz + min_common_depth - 1; - nid = of_read_number(&aa.arrays[index], 1); + domain.id = of_read_number(&aa.arrays[index], 1); - if (nid == 0xffff || nid >= nr_node_ids) - nid = default_nid; + if (domain.id == 0xffff) + domain.id = -1; + + nid = affinity_domain_to_nid(&domain); if (nid > 0) { index = lmb->aa_index * aa.array_sz;
We use ibm,associativity and ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays to derive the numa node numbers. These device tree properties are firmware indicated grouping of resources based on their hierarchy in the platform. These numbers (group id) are not sequential and hypervisor/firmware can follow different numbering schemes. For ex: on powernv platforms, we group them in the below order. * - CCM node ID * - HW card ID * - HW module ID * - Chip ID * - Core ID Based on ibm,associativity-reference-points we use one of the above group ids as Linux NUMA node id. (On PowerNV platform Chip ID is used). This results in Linux reporting non-linear NUMA node id and which also results in Linux reporting empty node 0 NUMA nodes. This can be resolved by mapping the firmware provided group id to a logical Linux NUMA id. In this patch, we do this only for pseries platforms considering the firmware group id is a virtualized entity and users would not have drawn any conclusion based on the Linux Numa Node id. On PowerNV platform since we have historically mapped Chip ID as Linux NUMA node id, we keep the existing Linux NUMA node id numbering. Before Fix: # numactl -H available: 2 nodes (0-1) node 0 cpus: node 0 size: 0 MB node 0 free: 0 MB node 1 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 node 1 size: 50912 MB node 1 free: 45248 MB node distances: node 0 1 0: 10 40 1: 40 10 after fix # numactl -H available: 1 nodes (0) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 node 0 size: 50912 MB node 0 free: 49724 MB node distances: node 0 0: 10 Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/topology.h | 5 ++ arch/powerpc/mm/numa.c | 74 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----- 2 files changed, 68 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)