Hi,
On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 02:54:01PM +0800 Huang Ying wrote:
> Now, AutoNUMA can only optimize the page placement among the NUMA nodes if the
> default memory policy is used. Because the memory policy specified explicitly
> should take precedence. But this seems too strict in some situations. For
> example, on a system with 4 NUMA nodes, if the memory of an application is
> bound
> to the node 0 and 1, AutoNUMA can potentially migrate the pages between the
> node
> 0 and 1 to reduce cross-node accessing without breaking the explicit memory
> binding policy.
>
> So in this patch, if mbind(.mode=MPOL_BIND, .flags=MPOL_MF_LAZY) is used to
> bind
> the memory of the application to multiple nodes, and in the hint page fault
> handler both the faulting page node and the accessing node are in the policy
> nodemask, the page will be tried to be migrated to the accessing node to
> reduce
> the cross-node accessing.
>
Do you have any performance numbers that show the effects of this on
a workload?
> [Peter Zijlstra: provided the simplified implementation method.]
>
> Questions:
>
> Sysctl knob kernel.numa_balancing can enable/disable AutoNUMA optimizing
> globally. But for the memory areas that are bound to multiple NUMA nodes,
> even
> if the AutoNUMA is enabled globally via the sysctl knob, we still need to
> enable
> AutoNUMA again with a special flag. Why not just optimize the page placement
> if
> possible as long as AutoNUMA is enabled globally? The interface would look
> simpler with that.
I agree. I think it should try to do this if globally enabled.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.hu...@intel.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <a...@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgor...@suse.de>
> Cc: Rik van Riel <r...@redhat.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <wi...@infradead.org>
> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.han...@intel.com>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rient...@google.com>
> ---
> mm/mempolicy.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index eddbe4e56c73..273969204732 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -2494,15 +2494,19 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct page *page, struct
> vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long
> break;
>
> case MPOL_BIND:
> -
> /*
> - * allows binding to multiple nodes.
> - * use current page if in policy nodemask,
> - * else select nearest allowed node, if any.
> - * If no allowed nodes, use current [!misplaced].
> + * Allows binding to multiple nodes. If both current and
> + * accessing nodes are in policy nodemask, migrate to
> + * accessing node to optimize page placement. Otherwise,
> + * use current page if in policy nodemask, else select
> + * nearest allowed node, if any. If no allowed nodes, use
> + * current [!misplaced].
> */
> - if (node_isset(curnid, pol->v.nodes))
> + if (node_isset(curnid, pol->v.nodes)) {
> + if (node_isset(thisnid, pol->v.nodes))
> + goto moron;
Nice label :)
> goto out;
> + }
> z = first_zones_zonelist(
> node_zonelist(numa_node_id(), GFP_HIGHUSER),
> gfp_zone(GFP_HIGHUSER),
> @@ -2516,6 +2520,7 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct page *page, struct
> vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long
>
> /* Migrate the page towards the node whose CPU is referencing it */
> if (pol->flags & MPOL_F_MORON) {
> +moron:
> polnid = thisnid;
>
> if (!should_numa_migrate_memory(current, page, curnid, thiscpu))
> --
> 2.28.0
>
Cheers,
Phil
--
