linux-kernel - [PATCH RFC lsfmm 0/6] mm: proactive reclaim and memory tiering topics

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20220416053902.68517-1-dave@stgolabs.net>
Date:   Fri, 15 Apr 2022 22:38:56 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     linux-mm@...ck.org
Cc:     mhocko@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
        yosryahmed@...gle.com, hannes@...xchg.org, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
        roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, gthelen@...gle.com,
        a.manzanares@...sung.com, heekwon.p@...sung.com,
        gim.jongmin@...sung.com, dave@...olabs.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC lsfmm 0/6] mm: proactive reclaim and memory tiering topics

Hello,

With the increasing popularity of memory tiering, the idea of this series is to trigger
some discussion around David's[1] system-wide proactive reclaim beyond memcg[2] as well
as sysfs as the interface for exporting system-wide tiering information[2]. I am
hoping this can be discussed at LSFMM, and while I know many are interested in tiering
subjects in general, I have not seen anyone bring this up in the list.

There has been some initial discussion towards the need to expose system-wide tiering
information to userspace. I thought I'd start with two sysfs files as a node attribute
that exports the demotion_node as well as whether or not the node is fast memory. This
was considered (and I agree) better than a new /sys/devices/system/tier/tierN/ interface.
So, are we going to go this route? If so, what further information is useful for users?
Does having instead a /sys/devices/system/node/nodeN/reclaim/ make sense?

Applies against Linus' current tree and has only been _gently_ tested.

Thanks!

Davidlohr Bueso (6):
  drivers/base/node: cleanup register_node()
  mm/vmscan: use node_is_toptier helper in node_reclaim
  mm: make __node_reclaim() more flexible
  mm: introduce per-node proactive reclaim interface
  mm/migration: export demotion_path of a node via sysfs
  mm/migrate: export whether or not tier is toptier in sysfs

 Documentation/ABI/stable/sysfs-devices-node |  22 ++++
 drivers/base/node.c                         |  68 ++++++++++--
 include/linux/migrate.h                     |  15 +++
 include/linux/swap.h                        |  16 +++
 include/trace/events/vmscan.h               |  12 +--
 mm/migrate.c                                |  15 +--
 mm/vmscan.c                                 | 108 +++++++++++++++-----
 7 files changed, 206 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)

--
2.26.2