Message-ID: <e4fe7d48-668b-4b38-8a69-da5f5b900be7@vondra.me>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2025 11:22:41 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: pgsql: Introduce pg_shmem_allocations_numa view
To: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>,
 Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot.pg@gmail.com>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
 Tomas Vondra <tomas.vondra@postgresql.org>,
 pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
References: <aFu6tmQ7EVaaNV9K@msg.df7cb.de>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
In-Reply-To: <aFu6tmQ7EVaaNV9K@msg.df7cb.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/e4fe7d48-668b-4b38-8a69-da5f5b900be7%40vondra.me>
Precedence: bulk

On 6/25/25 11:00, Christoph Berg wrote:
> Re: Bertrand Drouvot
>> +/*
>> + * Work around Linux kernel bug in 32-bit compat mode: do_pages_stat() has
>> + * incorrect pointer arithmetic for more than DO_PAGES_STAT_CHUNK_NR pages.
>> + */
>> +#if SIZEOF_SIZE_T == 4
> 
> I was also missing it in my suggested patch draft, but this should
> probably include #ifdef __linux__.
> 


> 
> Re: Tomas Vondra
>> +#ifdef USE_VALGRIND
>> +
>> +static inline void
>> +pg_numa_touch_mem_if_required(uint64 tmp, char *ptr)
> 
> Stupid question, if this function gets properly inlined, why not
> always use it as there should be no performance difference vs using a
> macro?
> 

TBH I'm not 100% sure it works correctly, I need to check it actually
touches the memory etc. It's possible it was discussed in one of the
earlier NUMA threads, and there are reasons to do a macro.

I also dislike the ifdefs because it adds subtle differences between the
"normal" code and the code tested with valgrind. So just having the
inlined function would be "nicer".

regards

-- 
Tomas Vondra