linux-kernel - Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces

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

Message-ID: <CAAPL-u8TtNoonOBDU1HZ-XPA31zsDvDAnO2xDigApypX-+jTYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 May 2022 00:19:01 -0700
From:   Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
        "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>,
        Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces

On Mon, May 2, 2022 at 8:20 AM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>
> > The current memory tiering interface needs to be improved to address
> > several important use cases:
>
> FWIW, I totally agree.  We knew when that code went in that the default
> ordering was feeble.  There were patches to export the demotion order
> and allow it to be modified from userspace, but they were jettisoned at
> some point.
>
> > Memory tiering hierarchy is rebuilt upon hot-add or hot-remove of a
> > memory node, but is NOT rebuilt upon hot-add or hot-remove of a CPU
> > node.
>
> Yeah, this would be a welcome improvement if we can get there.
>
> > * /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers
> >
> >   Format: node list (one tier per line, in the tier order)
> >
> >   When read, list memory nodes by tiers.
>
> Nit: this would seems to violate the one-value-per-file sysfs guideline.
>  It can be fixed by making tiers actual objects, which would have some
> other nice benefits too.
>

Good point.  One tier per file should work as well.  It can be even
better to have a separate tier sub-tree.