Re: [PATCH OLK-6.6 1/2] arm64/numa: Support node_reclaim_distance adjust for arch

On 2024/4/30 10:17, Hui Tang wrote:

hulk inclusion category: feature bugzilla: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/issues/I8PG0C CVE: NA

---

'node_reclaim_distance' affects scheduling behavior and memory reclamation, but the value is currently the default value and can not be set.

Now introduce the way to adjust 'node_reclaim_distance' depending on the cpu model.

Signed-off-by: Hui Tang tanghui20@huawei.com

arch/arm64/Kconfig | 13 +++++++ drivers/base/arch_numa.c | 79 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/Kconfig b/arch/arm64/Kconfig index 2712d3c73719..6de3e70f8362 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/Kconfig +++ b/arch/arm64/Kconfig @@ -2443,6 +2443,19 @@ config STACKPROTECTOR_PER_TASK def_bool y depends on STACKPROTECTOR && CC_HAVE_STACKPROTECTOR_SYSREG

+config ARCH_CUSTOM_NUMA_DISTANCE

• bool "Support custom node relaim distance"
• depends on ARM64 && ARCH_HISI && NUMA

No ARM64

• default n
• help

•  Allow arch to adjust node_reclaim_distance.
  

•  Some machines may have a specific node distance to achieve optimal
  

•  system performance. You can set a specific node_reclaim_distance based
  

•  on the system topology.
  

•  If unsure, say N.
  

and this config should under 'Common NUMA Features'

• config UNWIND_PATCH_PAC_INTO_SCS bool "Enable shadow call stack dynamically using code patching" # needs Clang with https://reviews.llvm.org/D111780 incorporated

diff --git a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c index 5b59d133b6af..af8b76e4f9fa 100644 --- a/drivers/base/arch_numa.c +++ b/drivers/base/arch_numa.c @@ -189,6 +189,83 @@ void __init setup_per_cpu_areas(void) } #endif

+#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_CUSTOM_NUMA_DISTANCE +#define DISTANCE_MAX (1 << DISTANCE_BITS) +static void get_numa_distance_info(int *numa_levels, int *max_distance) +{

• DECLARE_BITMAP(distance_map, DISTANCE_MAX);
• int max = 0;
• int i, j;
• bitmap_zero(distance_map, DISTANCE_MAX);
• for (i = 0; i < nr_node_ids; i++) {

• for (j = 0; j < nr_node_ids; j++) {
  

• 	int distance = node_distance(i, j);
  

• 	if (distance < LOCAL_DISTANCE ||
  

• 	    distance >= DISTANCE_MAX) {
  

• 		return;
  

• 	}
  

• 	if (distance > max)
  

• 		max = distance;
  

• 	bitmap_set(distance_map, distance, 1);
  

• }
  

• }
• if (numa_levels)

• *numa_levels = bitmap_weight(distance_map, DISTANCE_MAX);
  

• if (max_distance)

• *max_distance = max;
  

+}

+static int __init node_reclaim_distance_setup(char *str) +{

• int val;
• if (kstrtoint(str, 0, &val))

• return 0;
  

-EINVAL?

• if (val < LOCAL_DISTANCE || val >= DISTANCE_MAX)

• return 0;
  

-EINVAL?

• if (val != RECLAIM_DISTANCE) {

• node_reclaim_distance = val;
  

• pr_info("Force set node_reclaim_distance to %d\n", val);
  

• }
• return 0;

+} +early_param("node_reclaim_distance", node_reclaim_distance_setup);

+static void __init node_reclaim_distance_adjust(void) +{

• unsigned int model = read_cpuid_id() & MIDR_CPU_MODEL_MASK;
• int max_distance = 0;
• int numa_levels = 0;
• switch (model) {
• case MIDR_HISI_LINXICORE9100:

• get_numa_distance_info(&numa_levels, &max_distance);
  

• if (nr_node_ids != 4 || numa_levels <= 3 ||
  

Why 4/3, no comment, also no details in changelog

•     node_reclaim_distance != RECLAIM_DISTANCE ||
  

•     max_distance <= RECLAIM_DISTANCE)
  

• 	break;
  

• node_reclaim_distance = max_distance;
  

• pr_info("Force adjust node_reclaim_distance to %d\n",
  

• 	node_reclaim_distance);
  

• break;
  

• default:

• break;
  

• }

+} +#else +static inline void __init node_reclaim_distance_adjust(void) {} +#endif

• /**
  • numa_add_memblk() - Set node id to memblk
  • @nid: NUMA node ID of the new memblk

@@ -401,6 +478,8 @@ static int __init numa_init(int (*init_func)(void))

setup_node_to_cpumask_map();

• node_reclaim_distance_adjust();
• return 0; out_free_distance: numa_free_distance();