From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: <linux-mm@kvack.org>, <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>, Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Tim C Chen <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@gmail.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Hesham Almatary <hesham.almatary@huawei.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>,
Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@linux.ibm.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 7/7] mm/demotion: Demote pages according to allocation fallback order
Date: Fri, 27 May 2022 16:03:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220527160352.00006788@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220527122528.129445-8-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
On Fri, 27 May 2022 17:55:28 +0530
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> From: Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@linux.ibm.com>
>
> currently, a higher tier node can only be demoted to selected
> nodes on the next lower tier as defined by the demotion path,
> not any other node from any lower tier. This strict, hard-coded
> demotion order does not work in all use cases (e.g. some use cases
> may want to allow cross-socket demotion to another node in the same
> demotion tier as a fallback when the preferred demotion node is out
> of space). This demotion order is also inconsistent with the page
> allocation fallback order when all the nodes in a higher tier are
> out of space: The page allocation can fall back to any node from any
> lower tier, whereas the demotion order doesn't allow that currently.
>
> This patch adds support to get all the allowed demotion targets mask
> for node, also demote_page_list() function is modified to utilize this
> allowed node mask by filling it in migration_target_control structure
> before passing it to migrate_pages().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
Ah ok. So this deals with any tier with higher rank case.
Painful though it is I would suggest the series needs recreating
as a single set of steps to reach the end goal rather than introducing
one approach then modifying it. What you have now might work but as
a series it's very hard to review.
If their is a good reason to maintain this 'path to the answer' then
it can be done but it's going to make this harder to get review
+ merge.
Superficially this looks like it addresses my earlier comments.
Jonathan
> ---
> include/linux/migrate.h | 5 ++++
> mm/migrate.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> mm/vmscan.c | 38 ++++++++++++++----------------
> 3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/migrate.h b/include/linux/migrate.h
> index 77c581f47953..1f3cbd5185ca 100644
> --- a/include/linux/migrate.h
> +++ b/include/linux/migrate.h
> @@ -182,6 +182,7 @@ void node_remove_from_memory_tier(int node);
> int node_get_memory_tier_id(int node);
> int node_set_memory_tier_rank(int node, int tier);
> int node_reset_memory_tier(int node, int tier);
> +void node_get_allowed_targets(int node, nodemask_t *targets);
> #else
> #define numa_demotion_enabled false
> static inline int next_demotion_node(int node)
> @@ -189,6 +190,10 @@ static inline int next_demotion_node(int node)
> return NUMA_NO_NODE;
> }
>
> +static inline void node_get_allowed_targets(int node, nodemask_t *targets)
> +{
> + *targets = NODE_MASK_NONE;
> +}
> #endif /* CONFIG_TIERED_MEMORY */
>
> #endif /* _LINUX_MIGRATE_H */
> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> index 114c7428b9f3..84fac477538c 100644
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -2129,6 +2129,7 @@ struct memory_tier {
>
> struct demotion_nodes {
> nodemask_t preferred;
> + nodemask_t allowed;
> };
>
> #define to_memory_tier(device) container_of(device, struct memory_tier, dev)
> @@ -2475,6 +2476,25 @@ int node_set_memory_tier_rank(int node, int rank)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_memory_tier_rank);
>
> +void node_get_allowed_targets(int node, nodemask_t *targets)
> +{
> + /*
> + * node_demotion[] is updated without excluding this
> + * function from running.
> + *
> + * If any node is moving to lower tiers then modifications
> + * in node_demotion[] are still valid for this node, if any
> + * node is moving to higher tier then moving node may be
> + * used once for demotion which should be ok so rcu should
> + * be enough here.
> + */
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +
> + *targets = node_demotion[node].allowed;
> +
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +}
> +
> /**
> * next_demotion_node() - Get the next node in the demotion path
> * @node: The starting node to lookup the next node
> @@ -2534,8 +2554,10 @@ static void __disable_all_migrate_targets(void)
> {
> int node;
>
> - for_each_node_mask(node, node_states[N_MEMORY])
> + for_each_node_mask(node, node_states[N_MEMORY]) {
> node_demotion[node].preferred = NODE_MASK_NONE;
> + node_demotion[node].allowed = NODE_MASK_NONE;
> + }
> }
>
> static void disable_all_migrate_targets(void)
> @@ -2558,12 +2580,11 @@ static void disable_all_migrate_targets(void)
> */
> static void establish_migration_targets(void)
> {
> - struct list_head *ent;
> struct memory_tier *memtier;
> struct demotion_nodes *nd;
> - int tier, target = NUMA_NO_NODE, node;
> + int target = NUMA_NO_NODE, node;
> int distance, best_distance;
> - nodemask_t used;
> + nodemask_t used, allowed = NODE_MASK_NONE;
>
> if (!node_demotion)
> return;
> @@ -2603,6 +2624,29 @@ static void establish_migration_targets(void)
> }
> } while (1);
> }
> + /*
> + * Now build the allowed mask for each node collecting node mask from
> + * all memory tier below it. This allows us to fallback demotion page
> + * allocation to a set of nodes that is closer the above selected
> + * perferred node.
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry(memtier, &memory_tiers, list)
> + nodes_or(allowed, allowed, memtier->nodelist);
> + /*
> + * Removes nodes not yet in N_MEMORY.
> + */
> + nodes_and(allowed, node_states[N_MEMORY], allowed);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(memtier, &memory_tiers, list) {
> + /*
> + * Keep removing current tier from allowed nodes,
> + * This will remove all nodes in current and above
> + * memory tier from the allowed mask.
> + */
> + nodes_andnot(allowed, allowed, memtier->nodelist);
> + for_each_node_mask(node, memtier->nodelist)
> + node_demotion[node].allowed = allowed;
> + }
> }
>
> /*
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 1678802e03e7..feb994589481 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -1454,23 +1454,6 @@ static void folio_check_dirty_writeback(struct folio *folio,
> mapping->a_ops->is_dirty_writeback(&folio->page, dirty, writeback);
> }
>
> -static struct page *alloc_demote_page(struct page *page, unsigned long node)
> -{
> - struct migration_target_control mtc = {
> - /*
> - * Allocate from 'node', or fail quickly and quietly.
> - * When this happens, 'page' will likely just be discarded
> - * instead of migrated.
> - */
> - .gfp_mask = (GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE & ~__GFP_RECLAIM) |
> - __GFP_THISNODE | __GFP_NOWARN |
> - __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | GFP_NOWAIT,
> - .nid = node
> - };
> -
> - return alloc_migration_target(page, (unsigned long)&mtc);
> -}
> -
> /*
> * Take pages on @demote_list and attempt to demote them to
> * another node. Pages which are not demoted are left on
> @@ -1481,6 +1464,19 @@ static unsigned int demote_page_list(struct list_head *demote_pages,
> {
> int target_nid = next_demotion_node(pgdat->node_id);
> unsigned int nr_succeeded;
> + nodemask_t allowed_mask;
> +
> + struct migration_target_control mtc = {
> + /*
> + * Allocate from 'node', or fail quickly and quietly.
> + * When this happens, 'page' will likely just be discarded
> + * instead of migrated.
> + */
> + .gfp_mask = (GFP_HIGHUSER_MOVABLE & ~__GFP_RECLAIM) | __GFP_NOWARN |
> + __GFP_NOMEMALLOC | GFP_NOWAIT,
> + .nid = target_nid,
> + .nmask = &allowed_mask
> + };
>
> if (list_empty(demote_pages))
> return 0;
> @@ -1488,10 +1484,12 @@ static unsigned int demote_page_list(struct list_head *demote_pages,
> if (target_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> return 0;
>
> + node_get_allowed_targets(pgdat->node_id, &allowed_mask);
> +
> /* Demotion ignores all cpuset and mempolicy settings */
> - migrate_pages(demote_pages, alloc_demote_page, NULL,
> - target_nid, MIGRATE_ASYNC, MR_DEMOTION,
> - &nr_succeeded);
> + migrate_pages(demote_pages, alloc_migration_target, NULL,
> + (unsigned long)&mtc, MIGRATE_ASYNC, MR_DEMOTION,
> + &nr_succeeded);
>
> if (current_is_kswapd())
> __count_vm_events(PGDEMOTE_KSWAPD, nr_succeeded);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-27 15:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-26 21:22 RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces (v3) Wei Xu
2022-05-27 2:58 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-27 14:05 ` Hesham Almatary
2022-05-27 16:25 ` Wei Xu
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 0/7] mm/demotion: Memory tiers and demotion Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 1/7] mm/demotion: Add support for explicit memory tiers Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 13:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-02 6:07 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 2:49 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 3:56 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 5:33 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 6:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 6:27 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-06 7:53 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 8:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 8:52 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 9:02 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-08 1:24 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-08 7:16 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-08 8:24 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-08 8:27 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 2/7] mm/demotion: Expose per node memory tier to sysfs Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 14:15 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-03 8:40 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 14:59 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-06 16:01 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 16:16 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-06 16:39 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 17:46 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-07 14:32 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-08 7:18 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-08 8:25 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-08 8:29 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 3/7] mm/demotion: Build demotion targets based on explicit memory tiers Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 14:31 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-05-30 3:35 ` [mm/demotion] 8ebccd60c2: BUG:sleeping_function_called_from_invalid_context_at_mm/compaction.c kernel test robot
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 4/7] mm/demotion/dax/kmem: Set node's memory tier to MEMORY_TIER_PMEM Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-01 6:29 ` Bharata B Rao
2022-06-01 13:49 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-02 6:36 ` Bharata B Rao
2022-06-03 9:04 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 10:11 ` Bharata B Rao
2022-06-06 10:16 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 11:54 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-06 12:09 ` Bharata B Rao
2022-06-06 13:00 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 5/7] mm/demotion: Add support to associate rank with memory tier Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 14:45 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-05-27 15:45 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-05-30 12:36 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-06-02 6:41 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 6/7] mm/demotion: Add support for removing node from demotion memory tiers Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-02 6:43 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-27 12:25 ` [RFC PATCH v4 7/7] mm/demotion: Demote pages according to allocation fallback order Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-05-27 15:03 ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]
2022-06-02 7:35 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-03 15:09 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 0:43 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 4:07 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 5:26 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 6:21 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2022-06-06 7:42 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 8:02 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-06-06 8:06 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-06 17:07 ` Yang Shi
2022-05-27 13:40 ` RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces (v3) Aneesh Kumar K V
2022-05-27 16:30 ` Wei Xu
2022-05-29 4:31 ` Ying Huang
2022-05-30 12:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2022-05-31 1:57 ` Ying Huang
2022-06-07 19:25 ` Tim Chen
2022-06-08 4:41 ` Aneesh Kumar K V
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20220527160352.00006788@Huawei.com \
--to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=brice.goglin@gmail.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=gthelen@google.com \
--cc=hesham.almatary@huawei.com \
--cc=jvgediya@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=shy828301@gmail.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).