From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B007C19F28 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id EAF3B8E0001; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 01:03:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E5E036B0072; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 01:03:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id CFE768E0001; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 01:03:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2BF56B0071 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 01:03:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin07.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EF541A078D for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:51 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79753460262.07.931515E Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by imf19.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1619E1A00E7 for ; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2723Ubfd022581; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:33 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=pp1; bh=tgWTet1S9/wNhppRXIdVjkmPlCTrPBi71lPNHF0YQeM=; b=hrJwpADLw8fRx5SOL43EvWmD59tesk/o9v3kRuiYt0Yaf7LxkWpSc3/fok7ipnv1DRQ9 XVX4noAWcaDDL2NN/3oiracqU94Byp1rW81hW6vCW73rggvYoWdvVVGXlMRoqxOGvl86 AQEvQsHd5N/wPwfV+WT3KgfqMepDwx323yGdlDFVNscV4M3jNBDJSZA+o5xqmQflmAt9 MUqrqakvzRxVKmymzGc8XztTh+xuIGqvLvQfubmagnsIascT4ppVOgrBfsdeuK87opFy TEvxRuKCgsX2VV8FqVXiRoM9LD4DD2lHArBf33B8KTfjoV8mf21iyNRw1Vj3WEicpQNt wA== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3hpv2vt50n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 02 Aug 2022 05:03:33 +0000 Received: from m0098399.ppops.net (m0098399.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 2724rG7F016873; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:32 GMT Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3hpv2vt4x1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 02 Aug 2022 05:03:32 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 2724qIXr015132; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:28 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay12.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.197]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3hmv98k7gk-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 02 Aug 2022 05:03:28 +0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 27253Qp311534806 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:26 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF92CAE05A; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:25 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F686AE04D; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.109.205.170] (unknown [9.109.205.170]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 2 Aug 2022 05:03:22 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <3d649bb6-88dd-dd01-4c44-3bfba30a4630@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2022 10:33:21 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.12.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 1/8] mm/demotion: Add support for explicit memory tiers Content-Language: en-US To: Dan Williams , "Huang, Ying" Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Wei Xu , Yang Shi , Davidlohr Bueso , Tim C Chen , Michal Hocko , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Hesham Almatary , Dave Hansen , Jonathan Cameron , Alistair Popple , Johannes Weiner , jvgediya.oss@gmail.com, Jagdish Gediya References: <20220728190436.858458-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20220728190436.858458-2-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <62e890da7f784_577a029473@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> <874jyvjpw9.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> <62e89c9addcc_62c2a29443@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> From: Aneesh Kumar K V In-Reply-To: <62e89c9addcc_62c2a29443@dwillia2-xfh.jf.intel.com.notmuch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: U3MxZMuvgt7Jx9vQDXwcgiMtNVSgTpaM X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 6zXXkurctTsDJFMeXztQXEAUFkhez8pC Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Proofpoint-UnRewURL: 0 URL was un-rewritten MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.883,Hydra:6.0.517,FMLib:17.11.122.1 definitions=2022-08-02_02,2022-08-01_01,2022-06-22_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2206140000 definitions=main-2208020023 ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=hrJwpADL; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.156.1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1659416631; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=n/7rZEgTKvlIwK5HTm+u8R9Z8+nmZ6HR59cwM74esVRHpjEiSQjbV4QfLWlHaT6Cv1mBfn 2OaBMA/V3ad1LdttaUGoGIerP6Bu/FCW6B0gtAfJ88ytI8qV3JNuYxt/2SHjYWlqi2r8ew W1x31M8P6S3Ztfb4MECOQ1tzVBEImho= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1659416631; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=tgWTet1S9/wNhppRXIdVjkmPlCTrPBi71lPNHF0YQeM=; b=bCAHH1O20r1HPtFwUl+oClqvDf7cTzolud85CoRrUZZdEF22aT9HweKGIptbGcr4VculJZ lN89dinZHw7t+/8UNZT4obD90lfxNV3ZEdoSh5wyxb3AD1CNmzL3zVcXx5EwluzhsXsIKP lHL2yozXXYUO6H/cEyzREoaQmJDu1gM= X-Stat-Signature: 8eonjq8iiya4b9rwqtididscntjji6k8 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1619E1A00E7 X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 Authentication-Results: imf19.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=hrJwpADL; spf=pass (imf19.hostedemail.com: domain of aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.156.1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com X-HE-Tag: 1659416630-363665 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 8/2/22 9:10 AM, Dan Williams wrote: > Huang, Ying wrote: >> Dan Williams writes: >> >>> Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: >>>> In the current kernel, memory tiers are defined implicitly via a demotion path >>>> relationship between NUMA nodes, which is created during the kernel >>>> initialization and updated when a NUMA node is hot-added or hot-removed. The >>>> current implementation puts all nodes with CPU into the highest tier, and builds >>>> the tier hierarchy tier-by-tier by establishing the per-node demotion targets >>>> based on the distances between nodes. >>>> >>>> This current memory tier kernel implementation needs to be improved for several >>>> important use cases, >>>> >>>> The current tier initialization code always initializes each memory-only NUMA >>>> node into a lower tier. But a memory-only NUMA node may have a high performance >>>> memory device (e.g. a DRAM-backed memory-only node on a virtual machine) that >>>> should be put into a higher tier. >>>> >>>> The current tier hierarchy always puts CPU nodes into the top tier. But on a >>>> system with HBM or GPU devices, the memory-only NUMA nodes mapping these devices >>>> should be in the top tier, and DRAM nodes with CPUs are better to be placed into >>>> the next lower tier. >>>> >>>> With current kernel higher tier node can only be demoted to nodes with shortest >>>> distance on the next lower tier as defined by the demotion path, not any other >>>> node from any lower tier. This strict, 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. >>>> >>>> This patch series address the above by defining memory tiers explicitly. >>>> >>>> Linux kernel presents memory devices as NUMA nodes and each memory device is of >>>> a specific type. The memory type of a device is represented by its abstract >>>> distance. A memory tier corresponds to a range of abstract distance. This allows >>>> for classifying memory devices with a specific performance range into a memory >>>> tier. >>>> >>>> This patch configures the range/chunk size to be 128. The default DRAM >>>> abstract distance is 512. We can have 4 memory tiers below the default DRAM >>>> abstract distance which cover the range 0 - 127, 127 - 255, 256- 383, 384 - 511. >>>> Slower memory devices like persistent memory will have abstract distance below >>>> the default DRAM level and hence will be placed in these 4 lower tiers. >>>> >>>> A kernel parameter is provided to override the default memory tier. >>>> >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAAPL-u9Wv+nH1VOZTj=9p9S70Y3Qz3+63EkqncRDdHfubsrjfw@mail.gmail.com >>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/7b72ccf4-f4ae-cb4e-f411-74d055482026@linux.ibm.com >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jagdish Gediya >>>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V >>>> --- >>>> include/linux/memory-tiers.h | 17 ++++++ >>>> mm/Makefile | 1 + >>>> mm/memory-tiers.c | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 120 insertions(+) >>>> create mode 100644 include/linux/memory-tiers.h >>>> create mode 100644 mm/memory-tiers.c >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/memory-tiers.h b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..8d7884b7a3f0 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ >>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ >>>> +#ifndef _LINUX_MEMORY_TIERS_H >>>> +#define _LINUX_MEMORY_TIERS_H >>>> + >>>> +/* >>>> + * Each tier cover a abstrace distance chunk size of 128 >>>> + */ >>>> +#define MEMTIER_CHUNK_BITS 7 >>>> +#define MEMTIER_CHUNK_SIZE (1 << MEMTIER_CHUNK_BITS) >>>> +/* >>>> + * For now let's have 4 memory tier below default DRAM tier. >>>> + */ >>>> +#define MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_DRAM (1 << (MEMTIER_CHUNK_BITS + 2)) >>>> +/* leave one tier below this slow pmem */ >>>> +#define MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_PMEM (1 << MEMTIER_CHUNK_BITS) >>> >>> Why is memory type encoded in these values? There is no reason to >>> believe that PMEM is of a lower performance tier than DRAM. Consider >>> high performance energy backed DRAM that makes it "PMEM", consider CXL >>> attached DRAM over a switch topology and constrained links that makes it >>> a lower performance tier than locally attached DRAM. The names should be >>> associated with tiers that indicate their usage. Something like HOT, >>> GENERAL, and COLD. Where, for example, HOT is low capacity high >>> performance compared to the general purpose pool, and COLD is high >>> capacity low performance intended to offload the general purpose tier. >>> >>> It does not need to be exactly that ontology, but please try to not >>> encode policy meaning behind memory types. There has been explicit >>> effort to avoid that to date because types are fraught for declaring >>> relative performance characteristics, and the relative performance >>> changes based on what memory types are assembled in a given system. >> >> Yes. MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_PMEM is something over simplified. That is only >> used in this very first version to make it as simple as possible. > > I am failing to see the simplicity of using names that convey a > performance contract that are invalid depending on the system. > >> I think we can come up with something better in the later version. >> For example, identify the abstract distance of a PMEM device based on >> HMAT, etc. > > Memory tiering has nothing to do with persistence why is PMEM in the > name at all? > How about MEMTIER_DEFAULT_DAX_ADISTANCE with a comment there explaining if low level drivers don't initialize a memory_dev_type for a device/NUMA node, dax/kmem will consider the node slower than DRAM? >> And even in this first version, we should put MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_PMEM >> in dax/kmem.c. Because it's just for that specific type of memory >> used now, not for all PMEM. > > dax/kmem.c also handles HBM and "soft reserved" memory in general. There > is also nothing PMEM specific about the device-dax subsystem. > >> In the current design, memory type is used to report the performance of >> the hardware, in terms of abstract distance, per Johannes' suggestion. > > That sounds fine, just pick an abstract name, not an explicit memory > type. > >> Which is an abstraction of memory latency and bandwidth. Policy is >> described via memory tiers. Several memory types may be put in one >> memory tier. The abstract distance chunk size of the memory tier may >> be adjusted according to policy. > > That part all sounds good. That said, I do not see the benefit of > waiting to run away from these inadequate names. -aneesh