lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] lib: optimize cpumask_local_spread()
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 09:44:08 +0800 Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:

> In the multi-processors and NUMA system, I/O driver will find cpu cores
> that which shall be bound IRQ. When cpu cores in the local numa have
> been used, it is better to find the node closest to the local numa node,
> instead of choosing any online cpu immediately.
>
> On Huawei Kunpeng 920 server, there are 4 NUMA node(0 -3) in the 2-cpu
> system(0 - 1). We perform PS (parameter server) business test, the
> behavior of the service is that the client initiates a request through
> the network card, the server responds to the request after calculation.
> When two PS processes run on node2 and node3 separately and the
> network card is located on 'node2' which is in cpu1, the performance
> of node2 (26W QPS) and node3 (22W QPS) was different.
> It is better that the NIC queues are bound to the cpu1 cores in turn,
> then XPS will also be properly initialized, while cpumask_local_spread
> only considers the local node. When the number of NIC queues exceeds
> the number of cores in the local node, it returns to the online core
> directly. So when PS runs on node3 sending a calculated request,
> the performance is not as good as the node2. It is considered that
> the NIC and other I/O devices shall initialize the interrupt binding,
> if the cores of the local node are used up, it is reasonable to return
> the node closest to it.
>
> Let's optimize it and find the nearest node through NUMA distance for the
> non-local NUMA nodes. The performance will be better if it return the
> nearest node than the random node.
>
> After this patch, the performance of the node3 is the same as node2
> that is 26W QPS when the network card is still in 'node2'. Since it will
> return the closest non-local NUMA code rather than random node, it is no
> harm to others at least.

This is a little nicer:

--- a/lib/cpumask.c~lib-optimize-cpumask_local_spread-v3-fix
+++ a/lib/cpumask.c
@@ -254,7 +254,6 @@ static unsigned int __cpumask_local_spre
BUG();
}

-static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(spread_lock);
/**
* cpumask_local_spread - select the i'th cpu with local numa cpu's first
* @i: index number
@@ -270,6 +269,7 @@ unsigned int cpumask_local_spread(unsign
{
static int node_dist[MAX_NUMNODES];
static bool used[MAX_NUMNODES];
+ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(spread_lock);
unsigned long flags;
int cpu, j, id;

_
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-11-08 04:50    [W:0.713 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site