| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <87sfoffcfz.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2022 20:07:52 +0530
From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Tim C Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hesham Almatary <hesham.almatary@...wei.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
Jagdish Gediya <jvgediya@...ux.ibm.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 9/9] mm/demotion: Update node_is_toptier to work with
memory tiers
Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com> writes:
....
> > >
>> > > is this good (not tested)?
>> > > /*
>> > > * build the allowed promotion mask. Promotion is allowed
>> > > * from higher memory tier to lower memory tier only if
>> > > * lower memory tier doesn't include compute. We want to
>> > > * skip promotion from a memory tier, if any node which is
>> > > * part of that memory tier have CPUs. Once we detect such
>> > > * a memory tier, we consider that tier as top tier from
>> > > * which promotion is not allowed.
>> > > */
>> > > list_for_each_entry_reverse(memtier, &memory_tiers, list) {
>> > > nodes_and(allowed, node_state[N_CPU], memtier->nodelist);
>> > > if (nodes_empty(allowed))
>> > > nodes_or(promotion_mask, promotion_mask, allowed);
>> > > else
>> > > break;
>> > > }
>> > >
>> > > and then
>> > >
>> > > static inline bool node_is_toptier(int node)
>> > > {
>> > >
>> > > return !node_isset(node, promotion_mask);
>> > > }
>> > >
>> >
>> > This should work. But it appears unnatural. So, I don't think we
>> > should avoid to add more and more node masks to mitigate the design
>> > decision that we cannot access memory tier information directly. All
>> > these becomes simple and natural, if we can access memory tier
>> > information directly.
>> >
>>
>> how do you derive whether node is toptier details if we have memtier
>> details in pgdat?
>
> pgdat -> memory tier -> rank
>
> Then we can compare this rank with the fast memory rank. The fast
> memory rank can be calculated dynamically at appropriate places.
This is what I am testing now. We still need to closely audit that lock
free access to the NODE_DATA()->memtier. For v6 I will keep this as a
separate patch and once we all agree that it is safe, I will fold it
back.
diff --git a/include/linux/memory-tiers.h b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
index a388a806b61a..3e733de1a8a0 100644
--- a/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
+++ b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@
#define MAX_MEMORY_TIERS (MAX_STATIC_MEMORY_TIERS + 2)
extern bool numa_demotion_enabled;
-extern nodemask_t promotion_mask;
int node_create_and_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier);
int next_demotion_node(int node);
int node_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier);
@@ -25,15 +24,7 @@ int node_get_memory_tier_id(int node);
int node_reset_memory_tier(int node, int tier);
void node_remove_from_memory_tier(int node);
void node_get_allowed_targets(int node, nodemask_t *targets);
-
-/*
- * By default all nodes are top tiper. As we create new memory tiers
- * we below top tiers we add them to NON_TOP_TIER state.
- */
-static inline bool node_is_toptier(int node)
-{
- return !node_isset(node, promotion_mask);
-}
+bool node_is_toptier(int node);
#else
#define numa_demotion_enabled false
diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
index aab70355d64f..c4fcfd2b9980 100644
--- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
+++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
@@ -928,6 +928,9 @@ typedef struct pglist_data {
/* Per-node vmstats */
struct per_cpu_nodestat __percpu *per_cpu_nodestats;
atomic_long_t vm_stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS];
+#ifdef CONFIG_TIERED_MEMORY
+ struct memory_tier *memtier;
+#endif
} pg_data_t;
#define node_present_pages(nid) (NODE_DATA(nid)->node_present_pages)
diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c
index 29a038bb38b0..31ef0fab5f19 100644
--- a/mm/memory-tiers.c
+++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c
@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
#include <linux/random.h>
#include <linux/memory.h>
#include <linux/idr.h>
+#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
#include "internal.h"
@@ -26,7 +27,7 @@ struct demotion_nodes {
static void establish_migration_targets(void);
static DEFINE_MUTEX(memory_tier_lock);
static LIST_HEAD(memory_tiers);
-nodemask_t promotion_mask;
+static int top_tier_rank;
/*
* node_demotion[] examples:
*
@@ -135,7 +136,7 @@ static void memory_tier_device_release(struct device *dev)
if (tier->dev.id >= MAX_STATIC_MEMORY_TIERS)
ida_free(&memtier_dev_id, tier->dev.id);
- kfree(tier);
+ kfree_rcu(tier);
}
/*
@@ -233,6 +234,70 @@ static struct memory_tier *__get_memory_tier_from_id(int id)
return NULL;
}
+/*
+ * Called with memory_tier_lock. Hence the device references cannot
+ * be dropped during this function.
+ */
+static void memtier_node_clear(int node, struct memory_tier *memtier)
+{
+ pg_data_t *pgdat;
+
+ pgdat = NODE_DATA(node);
+ if (!pgdat)
+ return;
+
+ rcu_assign_pointer(pgdat->memtier, NULL);
+ /*
+ * Make sure read side see the NULL value before we clear the node
+ * from the nodelist.
+ */
+ synchronize_rcu();
+ node_clear(node, memtier->nodelist);
+}
+
+static void memtier_node_set(int node, struct memory_tier *memtier)
+{
+ pg_data_t *pgdat;
+
+ pgdat = NODE_DATA(node);
+ if (!pgdat)
+ return;
+ /*
+ * Make sure we mark the memtier NULL before we assign the new memory tier
+ * to the NUMA node. This make sure that anybody looking at NODE_DATA
+ * finds a NULL memtier or the one which is still valid.
+ */
+ rcu_assign_pointer(pgdat->memtier, NULL);
+ synchronize_rcu();
+ node_set(node, memtier->nodelist);
+ rcu_assign_pointer(pgdat->memtier, memtier);
+}
+
+bool node_is_toptier(int node)
+{
+ bool toptier;
+ pg_data_t *pgdat;
+ struct memory_tier *memtier;
+
+ pgdat = NODE_DATA(node);
+ if (!pgdat)
+ return false;
+
+ rcu_read_lock();
+ memtier = rcu_dereference(pgdat->memtier);
+ if (!memtier) {
+ toptier = true;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ if (memtier->rank >= top_tier_rank)
+ toptier = true;
+ else
+ toptier = false;
+out:
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ return toptier;
+}
+
static int __node_create_and_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier)
{
int ret = 0;
@@ -253,7 +318,7 @@ static int __node_create_and_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier)
goto out;
}
}
- node_set(node, memtier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_set(node, memtier);
out:
return ret;
}
@@ -275,12 +340,12 @@ int node_create_and_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier)
if (current_tier->dev.id == tier)
goto out;
- node_clear(node, current_tier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_clear(node, current_tier);
ret = __node_create_and_set_memory_tier(node, tier);
if (ret) {
/* reset it back to older tier */
- node_set(node, current_tier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_set(node, current_tier);
goto out;
}
@@ -305,7 +370,7 @@ static int __node_set_memory_tier(int node, int tier)
ret = -EINVAL;
goto out;
}
- node_set(node, memtier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_set(node, memtier);
out:
return ret;
}
@@ -374,12 +439,12 @@ int node_reset_memory_tier(int node, int tier)
if (current_tier->dev.id == tier)
goto out;
- node_clear(node, current_tier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_clear(node, current_tier);
ret = __node_set_memory_tier(node, tier);
if (ret) {
/* reset it back to older tier */
- node_set(node, current_tier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_set(node, current_tier);
goto out;
}
@@ -407,7 +472,7 @@ void node_remove_from_memory_tier(int node)
* empty then unregister it to make it invisible
* in sysfs.
*/
- node_clear(node, memtier->nodelist);
+ memtier_node_clear(node, memtier);
if (nodes_empty(memtier->nodelist))
unregister_memory_tier(memtier);
@@ -570,15 +635,13 @@ static void establish_migration_targets(void)
* a memory tier, we consider that tier as top tiper from
* which promotion is not allowed.
*/
- promotion_mask = NODE_MASK_NONE;
list_for_each_entry_reverse(memtier, &memory_tiers, list) {
nodes_and(allowed, node_states[N_CPU], memtier->nodelist);
- if (nodes_empty(allowed))
- nodes_or(promotion_mask, promotion_mask, memtier->nodelist);
- else
+ if (!nodes_empty(allowed)) {
+ top_tier_rank = memtier->rank;
break;
+ }
}
-
pr_emerg("top tier rank is %d\n", top_tier_rank);
allowed = NODE_MASK_NONE;
/*
@@ -748,7 +811,7 @@ static const struct attribute_group *memory_tier_attr_groups[] = {
static int __init memory_tier_init(void)
{
- int ret;
+ int ret, node;
struct memory_tier *memtier;
ret = subsys_system_register(&memory_tier_subsys, memory_tier_attr_groups);
@@ -766,7 +829,13 @@ static int __init memory_tier_init(void)
panic("%s() failed to register memory tier: %d\n", __func__, ret);
/* CPU only nodes are not part of memory tiers. */
- memtier->nodelist = node_states[N_MEMORY];
+ for_each_node_state(node, N_MEMORY) {
+ /*
+ * Should be safe to do this early in the boot.
+ */
+ NODE_DATA(node)->memtier = memtier;
+ node_set(node, memtier->nodelist);
+ }
migrate_on_reclaim_init();
return 0;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists