linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/9] mm/demotion: Add support for explicit memory tiers

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: <a4af7598-7bd3-0e70-a434-b1237ca403d6@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jun 2022 21:43:52 +0530
From:   Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        Wei Xu <weixugc@...gle.com>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.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 1/9] mm/demotion: Add support for explicit memory tiers

On 6/8/22 9:25 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 08, 2022 at 10:11:31AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 03, 2022 at 07:12:29PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>>> +#ifndef _LINUX_MEMORY_TIERS_H
>>> +#define _LINUX_MEMORY_TIERS_H
>>> +
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TIERED_MEMORY
>>> +
>>> +#define MEMORY_TIER_HBM_GPU	0
>>> +#define MEMORY_TIER_DRAM	1
>>> +#define MEMORY_TIER_PMEM	2
>>> +
>>> +#define MEMORY_RANK_HBM_GPU	300
>>> +#define MEMORY_RANK_DRAM	200
>>> +#define MEMORY_RANK_PMEM	100
>>> +
>>> +#define DEFAULT_MEMORY_TIER	MEMORY_TIER_DRAM
>>> +#define MAX_MEMORY_TIERS  3
>>
>> I understand the names are somewhat arbitrary, and the tier ID space
>> can be expanded down the line by bumping MAX_MEMORY_TIERS.
>>
>> But starting out with a packed ID space can get quite awkward for
>> users when new tiers - especially intermediate tiers - show up in
>> existing configurations. I mentioned in the other email that DRAM !=
>> DRAM, so new tiers seem inevitable already.
>>
>> It could make sense to start with a bigger address space and spread
>> out the list of kernel default tiers a bit within it:
>>
>> MEMORY_TIER_GPU		0
>> MEMORY_TIER_DRAM	10
>> MEMORY_TIER_PMEM	20
> 
> Forgive me if I'm asking a question that has been answered. I went
> back to earlier threads and couldn't work it out - maybe there were
> some off-list discussions? Anyway...
> 
> Why is there a distinction between tier ID and rank? I undestand that
> rank was added because tier IDs were too few. But if rank determines
> ordering, what is the use of a separate tier ID? IOW, why not make the
> tier ID space wider and have the kernel pick a few spread out defaults
> based on known hardware, with plenty of headroom to be future proof.
> 
>    $ ls tiers
>    100				# DEFAULT_TIER
>    $ cat tiers/100/nodelist
>    0-1				# conventional numa nodes
> 
>    <pmem is onlined>
> 
>    $ grep . tiers/*/nodelist
>    tiers/100/nodelist:0-1	# conventional numa
>    tiers/200/nodelist:2		# pmem
> 
>    $ grep . nodes/*/tier
>    nodes/0/tier:100
>    nodes/1/tier:100
>    nodes/2/tier:200
> 
>    <unknown device is online as node 3, defaults to 100>
> 
>    $ grep . tiers/*/nodelist
>    tiers/100/nodelist:0-1,3
>    tiers/200/nodelist:2
> 
>    $ echo 300 >nodes/3/tier
>    $ grep . tiers/*/nodelist
>    tiers/100/nodelist:0-1
>    tiers/200/nodelist:2
>    tiers/300/nodelist:3
> 
>    $ echo 200 >nodes/3/tier
>    $ grep . tiers/*/nodelist
>    tiers/100/nodelist:0-1	
>    tiers/200/nodelist:2-3
> 
> etc.

tier ID is also used as device id memtier.dev.id. It was discussed that 
we would need the ability to change the rank value of a memory tier. If 
we make rank value same as tier ID or tier device id, we will not be 
able to support that.

-aneesh