Message-ID: <20240403180425.00003be0@Huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2024 18:04:25 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To: "Ho-Ren (Jack) Chuang" <horenchuang@...edance.com>
CC: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>, Gregory Price
	<gourry.memverge@...il.com>, <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>, <mhocko@...e.com>,
	<tj@...nel.org>, <john@...alactic.com>, Eishan Mirakhur
	<emirakhur@...ron.com>, Vinicius Tavares Petrucci <vtavarespetr@...ron.com>,
	Ravis OpenSrc <Ravis.OpenSrc@...ron.com>, Alistair Popple
	<apopple@...dia.com>, Srinivasulu Thanneeru <sthanneeru@...ron.com>, SeongJae
 Park <sj@...nel.org>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Vishal Verma
	<vishal.l.verma@...el.com>, "Dave Jiang" <dave.jiang@...el.com>, Andrew
 Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
	<linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@...ck.org>, "Ho-Ren (Jack) Chuang" <horenc@...edu>, "Ho-Ren (Jack)
 Chuang" <horenchuang@...il.com>, <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>, Hao Xiang
	<hao.xiang@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/2] memory tier: create CPUless memory tiers after
 obtaining HMAT info

A few minor comments inline.

> diff --git a/include/linux/memory-tiers.h b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
> index a44c03c2ba3a..16769552a338 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memory-tiers.h
> @@ -140,12 +140,13 @@ static inline int mt_perf_to_adistance(struct access_coordinate *perf, int *adis
>  	return -EIO;
>  }
>  
> -struct memory_dev_type *mt_find_alloc_memory_type(int adist, struct list_head *memory_types)
> +static inline struct memory_dev_type *mt_find_alloc_memory_type(int adist,
> +					struct list_head *memory_types)
>  {
>  	return NULL;
>  }
>  
> -void mt_put_memory_types(struct list_head *memory_types)
> +static inline void mt_put_memory_types(struct list_head *memory_types)
>  {
Why in this patch and not previous one?
>  
>  }
> diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c
> index 974af10cfdd8..44fa10980d37 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,11 @@ struct node_memory_type_map {
>  
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(memory_tier_lock);
>  static LIST_HEAD(memory_tiers);
> +/*
> + * The list is used to store all memory types that are not created
> + * by a device driver.
> + */
> +static LIST_HEAD(default_memory_types);
>  static struct node_memory_type_map node_memory_types[MAX_NUMNODES];
>  struct memory_dev_type *default_dram_type;
>  
> @@ -108,6 +113,8 @@ static struct demotion_nodes *node_demotion __read_mostly;
>  
>  static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(mt_adistance_algorithms);
>  
> +/* The lock is used to protect `default_dram_perf*` info and nid. */
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(default_dram_perf_lock);
>  static bool default_dram_perf_error;
>  static struct access_coordinate default_dram_perf;
>  static int default_dram_perf_ref_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> @@ -505,7 +512,8 @@ static inline void __init_node_memory_type(int node, struct memory_dev_type *mem
>  static struct memory_tier *set_node_memory_tier(int node)
>  {
>  	struct memory_tier *memtier;
> -	struct memory_dev_type *memtype;
> +	struct memory_dev_type *mtype = default_dram_type;

Does the rename add anything major to the patch?
If not I'd leave it alone to reduce the churn and give
a more readable patch.  If it is worth doing perhaps
a precursor patch?

> +	int adist = MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_DRAM;
>  	pg_data_t *pgdat = NODE_DATA(node);
>  
>  
> @@ -514,11 +522,20 @@ static struct memory_tier *set_node_memory_tier(int node)
>  	if (!node_state(node, N_MEMORY))
>  		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>  
> -	__init_node_memory_type(node, default_dram_type);
> +	mt_calc_adistance(node, &adist);
> +	if (node_memory_types[node].memtype == NULL) {
> +		mtype = mt_find_alloc_memory_type(adist, &default_memory_types);
> +		if (IS_ERR(mtype)) {
> +			mtype = default_dram_type;
> +			pr_info("Failed to allocate a memory type. Fall back.\n");
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	__init_node_memory_type(node, mtype);
>  
> -	memtype = node_memory_types[node].memtype;
> -	node_set(node, memtype->nodes);
> -	memtier = find_create_memory_tier(memtype);
> +	mtype = node_memory_types[node].memtype;
> +	node_set(node, mtype->nodes);
> +	memtier = find_create_memory_tier(mtype);
>  	if (!IS_ERR(memtier))
>  		rcu_assign_pointer(pgdat->memtier, memtier);
>  	return memtier;
> @@ -655,6 +672,33 @@ void mt_put_memory_types(struct list_head *memory_types)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mt_put_memory_types);
>  
> +/*
> + * This is invoked via `late_initcall()` to initialize memory tiers for
> + * CPU-less memory nodes after driver initialization, which is
> + * expected to provide `adistance` algorithms.
> + */
> +static int __init memory_tier_late_init(void)
> +{
> +	int nid;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&memory_tier_lock);
> +	for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY)
> +		if (node_memory_types[nid].memtype == NULL)
> +			/*
> +			 * Some device drivers may have initialized memory tiers
> +			 * between `memory_tier_init()` and `memory_tier_late_init()`,
> +			 * potentially bringing online memory nodes and
> +			 * configuring memory tiers. Exclude them here.
> +			 */

Does the comment refer to this path, or to ones where memtype is set?

> +			set_node_memory_tier(nid);

Given the large comment I would add {} to help with readability.
You could flip the logic to reduce indent
	for_each_node_state(nid, N_MEMORY) {
		if (node_memory_types[nid].memtype)
			continue;
		/*
		 * Some device drivers may have initialized memory tiers
		 * between `memory_tier_init()` and `memory_tier_late_init()`,
		 * potentially bringing online memory nodes and
		 * configuring memory tiers. Exclude them here.
		 */
		set_node_memory_tier(nid);


> +
> +	establish_demotion_targets();
> +	mutex_unlock(&memory_tier_lock);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +late_initcall(memory_tier_late_init);
> +
>  static void dump_hmem_attrs(struct access_coordinate *coord, const char *prefix)
>  {
>  	pr_info(
> @@ -668,7 +712,7 @@ int mt_set_default_dram_perf(int nid, struct access_coordinate *perf,
>  {
>  	int rc = 0;
>  
> -	mutex_lock(&memory_tier_lock);
> +	mutex_lock(&default_dram_perf_lock);

As below, this is a classic case where guard() will help readability.

>  	if (default_dram_perf_error) {
>  		rc = -EIO;
>  		goto out;
> @@ -716,23 +760,30 @@ int mt_set_default_dram_perf(int nid, struct access_coordinate *perf,
>  	}
>  
>  out:
> -	mutex_unlock(&memory_tier_lock);
> +	mutex_unlock(&default_dram_perf_lock);
>  	return rc;
>  }
>  
>  int mt_perf_to_adistance(struct access_coordinate *perf, int *adist)
>  {
> -	if (default_dram_perf_error)
> -		return -EIO;
> +	int rc = 0;

Looks like rc is set in all paths that reach where it isused.

>  
> -	if (default_dram_perf_ref_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE)
> -		return -ENOENT;
> +	mutex_lock(&default_dram_perf_lock);

This would benefit quite a lot from
guard(mutex)(&default_dram_perf_lock);
and direct returns throughout.


> +	if (default_dram_perf_error) {
> +		rc = -EIO;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (perf->read_latency + perf->write_latency == 0 ||
> -	    perf->read_bandwidth + perf->write_bandwidth == 0)
> -		return -EINVAL;
> +	    perf->read_bandwidth + perf->write_bandwidth == 0) {
> +		rc = -EINVAL;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
>  
> -	mutex_lock(&memory_tier_lock);
> +	if (default_dram_perf_ref_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE) {
> +		rc = -ENOENT;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
>  	/*
>  	 * The abstract distance of a memory node is in direct proportion to
>  	 * its memory latency (read + write) and inversely proportional to its
> @@ -745,9 +796,10 @@ int mt_perf_to_adistance(struct access_coordinate *perf, int *adist)
>  		(default_dram_perf.read_latency + default_dram_perf.write_latency) *
>  		(default_dram_perf.read_bandwidth + default_dram_perf.write_bandwidth) /
>  		(perf->read_bandwidth + perf->write_bandwidth);
> -	mutex_unlock(&memory_tier_lock);
>  
> -	return 0;
> +out:
> +	mutex_unlock(&default_dram_perf_lock);
> +	return rc;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mt_perf_to_adistance);
>  
> @@ -858,7 +910,8 @@ static int __init memory_tier_init(void)
>  	 * For now we can have 4 faster memory tiers with smaller adistance
>  	 * than default DRAM tier.
>  	 */
> -	default_dram_type = alloc_memory_type(MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_DRAM);
> +	default_dram_type = mt_find_alloc_memory_type(MEMTIER_ADISTANCE_DRAM,
> +									&default_memory_types);

Unusual indenting.  Align with just after (

>  	if (IS_ERR(default_dram_type))
>  		panic("%s() failed to allocate default DRAM tier\n", __func__);
>  
> @@ -868,6 +921,14 @@ static int __init memory_tier_init(void)
>  	 * types assigned.
>  	 */
>  	for_each_node_state(node, N_MEMORY) {
> +		if (!node_state(node, N_CPU))
> +			/*
> +			 * Defer memory tier initialization on CPUless numa nodes.
> +			 * These will be initialized after firmware and devices are

I think this wraps at just over 80 chars.  Seems silly to wrap so tightly and not
quite fit under 80. (this is about 83 chars.

> +			 * initialized.
> +			 */
> +			continue;
> +
>  		memtier = set_node_memory_tier(node);
>  		if (IS_ERR(memtier))
>  			/*

Powered by blists - more mailing lists