diff options
| author | Kees Cook <kees+treewide@kernel.org> | 2026-09-02 15:31:14 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org> | 2026-09-04 21:37:00 -0700 |
| commit | 3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d (patch) | |
| tree | c65086f9bdcd48c6360fb7cb4598bca084da1f32 /Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst | |
| download | linux-stable-3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d.tar.gz linux-stable-3a2c4d55e32ad65efebdb6de44eef3bfa08bb49d.zip | |
treewide: refresh kmalloc_obj() conversionsgrafted
This is another run of the Coccinelle script for converting kmalloc()
family of allocations to kmalloc_obj() via the existing rules in
scripts/coccinelle/api/kmalloc_objs.cocci
This catches both the set of kmalloc() uses added since the first
kmalloc_obj() conversions in v7.0 and adds a large group missed in the
first pass due to Coccinelle not interacting well with the cleanup.h
scoped_...() family of macros[1]. I worked around this with spatch's
"--macro-file" argument to a file with all the scoped_...() macros mapped
to Coccinelle's YACFE_ITERATOR[2] as that was the closest viable control
flow indicator I could find.
Build tested allmodconfig on x86, arm64, arm, loongarch, mips, powerpc,
riscv, and s390 with no new warnings.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202609021314.8A9C0B8@keescook/ [1]
Link: https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/master/standard.h [2]
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <kees+treewide@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst | 55 |
1 files changed, 55 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst new file mode 100644 index 000000000..08ec2c2bd --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/numastat.rst @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +=============================== +Numa policy hit/miss statistics +=============================== + +/sys/devices/system/node/node*/numastat + +All units are pages. Hugepages have separate counters. + +The numa_hit, numa_miss and numa_foreign counters reflect how well processes +are able to allocate memory from nodes they prefer. If they succeed, numa_hit +is incremented on the preferred node, otherwise numa_foreign is incremented on +the preferred node and numa_miss on the node where allocation succeeded. + +Usually preferred node is the one local to the CPU where the process executes, +but restrictions such as mempolicies can change that, so there are also two +counters based on CPU local node. local_node is similar to numa_hit and is +incremented on allocation from a node by CPU on the same node. other_node is +similar to numa_miss and is incremented on the node where allocation succeeds +from a CPU from a different node. Note there is no counter analogical to +numa_foreign. + +In more detail: + +=============== ============================================================ +numa_hit A process wanted to allocate memory from this node, + and succeeded. + +numa_miss A process wanted to allocate memory from another node, + but ended up with memory from this node. + +numa_foreign A process wanted to allocate on this node, + but ended up with memory from another node. + +local_node A process ran on this node's CPU, + and got memory from this node. + +other_node A process ran on a different node's CPU + and got memory from this node. + +interleave_hit Interleaving wanted to allocate from this node + and succeeded. +=============== ============================================================ + +For easier reading you can use the numastat utility from the numactl package +(http://oss.sgi.com/projects/libnuma/). Note that it only works +well right now on machines with a small number of CPUs. + +Note that on systems with memoryless nodes (where a node has CPUs but no +memory) the numa_hit, numa_miss and numa_foreign statistics can be skewed +heavily. In the current kernel implementation, if a process prefers a +memoryless node (i.e. because it is running on one of its local CPU), the +implementation actually treats one of the nearest nodes with memory as the +preferred node. As a result, such allocation will not increase the numa_foreign +counter on the memoryless node, and will skew the numa_hit, numa_miss and +numa_foreign statistics of the nearest node. |
