Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
接近 2 年 前同步成功

通知 8
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 04 9月, 2021 7 次提交
    • F
      mm/mempolicy: unify the create() func for bind/interleave/prefer-many policies · be897d48
      由 Feng Tang 提交于 
      As they all do the same thing: sanity check and save nodemask info, create
one mpol_new_nodemask() to reduce redundancy.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1627970362-61305-6-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.comSigned-off-by: NFeng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Acked-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      be897d48
    • B
      mm/mempolicy: advertise new MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY · a38a59fd
      由 Ben Widawsky 提交于 
      Adds a new mode to the existing mempolicy modes, MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY.

MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY will be adequately documented in the internal
admin-guide with this patch.  Eventually, the man pages for mbind(2),
get_mempolicy(2), set_mempolicy(2) and numactl(8) will also have text
about this mode.  Those shall contain the canonical reference.

NUMA systems continue to become more prevalent.  New technologies like
PMEM make finer grain control over memory access patterns increasingly
desirable.  MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY allows userspace to specify a set of nodes
that will be tried first when performing allocations.  If those
allocations fail, all remaining nodes will be tried.  It's a straight
forward API which solves many of the presumptive needs of system
administrators wanting to optimize workloads on such machines.  The mode
will work either per VMA, or per thread.

[Michal Hocko: refine kernel doc for MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY]

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630212517.308045-13-ben.widawsky@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1627970362-61305-5-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.comSigned-off-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NFeng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Acked-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      a38a59fd
    • F
      mm/memplicy: add page allocation function for MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY policy · 4c54d949
      由 Feng Tang 提交于 
      The semantics of MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY is similar to MPOL_PREFERRED, that it
will first try to allocate memory from the preferred node(s), and fallback
to all nodes in system when first try fails.

Add a dedicated function alloc_pages_preferred_many() for it just like for
'interleave' policy, which will be used by 2 general memoory allocation
APIs: alloc_pages() and alloc_pages_vma()

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630212517.308045-9-ben.widawsky@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1627970362-61305-3-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.comSuggested-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Originally-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Co-developed-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NFeng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Acked-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      4c54d949
    • D
      mm/mempolicy: add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY for multiple preferred nodes · b27abacc
      由 Dave Hansen 提交于 
      Patch series "Introduce multi-preference mempolicy", v7.

This patch series introduces the concept of the MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY
mempolicy.  This mempolicy mode can be used with either the
set_mempolicy(2) or mbind(2) interfaces.  Like the MPOL_PREFERRED
interface, it allows an application to set a preference for nodes which
will fulfil memory allocation requests.  Unlike the MPOL_PREFERRED mode,
it takes a set of nodes.  Like the MPOL_BIND interface, it works over a
set of nodes.  Unlike MPOL_BIND, it will not cause a SIGSEGV or invoke the
OOM killer if those preferred nodes are not available.

Along with these patches are patches for libnuma, numactl, numademo, and
memhog.  They still need some polish, but can be found here:
https://gitlab.com/bwidawsk/numactl/-/tree/prefer-many It allows new
usage: `numactl -P 0,3,4`

The goal of the new mode is to enable some use-cases when using tiered memory
usage models which I've lovingly named.

1a. The Hare - The interconnect is fast enough to meet bandwidth and
    latency requirements allowing preference to be given to all nodes with
    "fast" memory.
1b. The Indiscriminate Hare - An application knows it wants fast
    memory (or perhaps slow memory), but doesn't care which node it runs
    on.  The application can prefer a set of nodes and then xpu bind to
    the local node (cpu, accelerator, etc).  This reverses the nodes are
    chosen today where the kernel attempts to use local memory to the CPU
    whenever possible.  This will attempt to use the local accelerator to
    the memory.
2.  The Tortoise - The administrator (or the application itself) is
    aware it only needs slow memory, and so can prefer that.

Much of this is almost achievable with the bind interface, but the bind
interface suffers from an inability to fallback to another set of nodes if
binding fails to all nodes in the nodemask.

Like MPOL_BIND a nodemask is given. Inherently this removes ordering from the
preference.

> /* Set first two nodes as preferred in an 8 node system. */
> const unsigned long nodes = 0x3
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY, &nodes, 8);

> /* Mimic interleave policy, but have fallback *.
> const unsigned long nodes = 0xaa
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY, &nodes, 8);

Some internal discussion took place around the interface. There are two
alternatives which we have discussed, plus one I stuck in:

1. Ordered list of nodes.  Currently it's believed that the added
   complexity is nod needed for expected usecases.
2. A flag for bind to allow falling back to other nodes.  This
   confuses the notion of binding and is less flexible than the current
   solution.
3. Create flags or new modes that helps with some ordering.  This
   offers both a friendlier API as well as a solution for more customized
   usage.  It's unknown if it's worth the complexity to support this.
   Here is sample code for how this might work:

> // Prefer specific nodes for some something wacky
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY, 0x17c, 1024);
>
> // Default
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY | MPOL_F_PREFER_ORDER_SOCKET, NULL, 0);
> // which is the same as
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_DEFAULT, NULL, 0);
>
> // The Hare
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY | MPOL_F_PREFER_ORDER_TYPE, NULL, 0);
>
> // The Tortoise
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY | MPOL_F_PREFER_ORDER_TYPE_REV, NULL, 0);
>
> // Prefer the fast memory of the first two sockets
> set_mempolicy(MPOL_PREFER_MANY | MPOL_F_PREFER_ORDER_TYPE, -1, 2);
>

This patch (of 5):

The NUMA APIs currently allow passing in a "preferred node" as a single
bit set in a nodemask.  If more than one bit it set, bits after the first
are ignored.

This single node is generally OK for location-based NUMA where memory
being allocated will eventually be operated on by a single CPU.  However,
in systems with multiple memory types, folks want to target a *type* of
memory instead of a location.  For instance, someone might want some
high-bandwidth memory but do not care about the CPU next to which it is
allocated.  Or, they want a cheap, high capacity allocation and want to
target all NUMA nodes which have persistent memory in volatile mode.  In
both of these cases, the application wants to target a *set* of nodes, but
does not want strict MPOL_BIND behavior as that could lead to OOM killer
or SIGSEGV.

So add MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY policy to support the multiple preferred nodes
requirement.  This is not a pie-in-the-sky dream for an API.  This was a
response to a specific ask of more than one group at Intel.  Specifically:

1. There are existing libraries that target memory types such as
   https://github.com/memkind/memkind.  These are known to suffer from
   SIGSEGV's when memory is low on targeted memory "kinds" that span more
   than one node.  The MCDRAM on a Xeon Phi in "Cluster on Die" mode is an
   example of this.

2. Volatile-use persistent memory users want to have a memory policy
   which is targeted at either "cheap and slow" (PMEM) or "expensive and
   fast" (DRAM).  However, they do not want to experience allocation
   failures when the targeted type is unavailable.

3. Allocate-then-run.  Generally, we let the process scheduler decide
   on which physical CPU to run a task.  That location provides a default
   allocation policy, and memory availability is not generally considered
   when placing tasks.  For situations where memory is valuable and
   constrained, some users want to allocate memory first, *then* allocate
   close compute resources to the allocation.  This is the reverse of the
   normal (CPU) model.  Accelerators such as GPUs that operate on
   core-mm-managed memory are interested in this model.

A check is added in sanitize_mpol_flags() to not permit 'prefer_many'
policy to be used for now, and will be removed in later patch after all
implementations for 'prefer_many' are ready, as suggested by Michal Hocko.

[mhocko@kernel.org: suggest to refine policy_node/policy_nodemask handling]

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1627970362-61305-1-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200630212517.308045-4-ben.widawsky@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1627970362-61305-2-git-send-email-feng.tang@intel.comCo-developed-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NBen Widawsky <ben.widawsky@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NDave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: NFeng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Acked-by: NMichal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>b
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      b27abacc
    • B
      mm/mempolicy: use readable NUMA_NO_NODE macro instead of magic number · 062db293
      由 Baolin Wang 提交于 
      The caller of mpol_misplaced() already use NUMA_NO_NODE to check whether
current page node is misplaced, thus using NUMA_NO_NODE in
mpol_misplaced() instead of magic number is more readable.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1b77c0ce21183fa86f4db250b115cf5e27396528.1627558356.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.comSigned-off-by: NBaolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Reviewed-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      062db293
    • H
      mm/migrate: add sysfs interface to enable reclaim migration · 20b51af1
      由 Huang Ying 提交于 
      Some method is obviously needed to enable reclaim-based migration.

Just like traditional autonuma, there will be some workloads that will
benefit like workloads with more "static" configurations where hot pages
stay hot and cold pages stay cold.  If pages come and go from the hot and
cold sets, the benefits of this approach will be more limited.

The benefits are truly workload-based and *not* hardware-based.  We do not
believe that there is a viable threshold where certain hardware
configurations should have this mechanism enabled while others do not.

To be conservative, earlier work defaulted to disable reclaim- based
migration and did not include a mechanism to enable it.  This proposes add
a new sysfs file

  /sys/kernel/mm/numa/demotion_enabled

as a method to enable it.

We are open to any alternative that allows end users to enable this
mechanism or disable it if workload harm is detected (just like
traditional autonuma).

Once this is enabled page demotion may move data to a NUMA node that does
not fall into the cpuset of the allocating process.  This could be
construed to violate the guarantees of cpusets.  However, since this is an
opt-in mechanism, the assumption is that anyone enabling it is content to
relax the guarantees.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210721063926.3024591-9-ying.huang@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210715055145.195411-10-ying.huang@intel.comSigned-off-by: NHuang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com>
Originally-by: NDave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>
Cc: Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Cc: Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      20b51af1
    • Y
      mm/migrate: enable returning precise migrate_pages() success count · 5ac95884
      由 Yang Shi 提交于 
      Under normal circumstances, migrate_pages() returns the number of pages
migrated.  In error conditions, it returns an error code.  When returning
an error code, there is no way to know how many pages were migrated or not
migrated.

Make migrate_pages() return how many pages are demoted successfully for
all cases, including when encountering errors.  Page reclaim behavior will
depend on this in subsequent patches.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210721063926.3024591-3-ying.huang@intel.com
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210715055145.195411-4-ying.huang@intel.comSigned-off-by: NYang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: NDave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: N"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de> [optional parameter]
Reviewed-by: NYang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: NZi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      5ac95884
  3. 01 7月, 2021 5 次提交
  5. 30 6月, 2021 2 次提交
  7. 07 5月, 2021 2 次提交
  9. 06 5月, 2021 3 次提交
  11. 01 5月, 2021 5 次提交
  13. 25 2月, 2021 2 次提交
    • M
      mm/mempolicy: use helper range_in_vma() in queue_pages_test_walk() · ce33135c
      由 Miaohe Lin 提交于 
      The helper range_in_vma() is introduced via commit 017b1660 ("mm:
migration: fix migration of huge PMD shared pages"). But we forgot to
use it in queue_pages_test_walk().

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210130091352.20220-1-linmiaohe@huawei.comSigned-off-by: NMiaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: NDavid Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      ce33135c
    • H
      numa balancing: migrate on fault among multiple bound nodes · bda420b9
      由 Huang Ying 提交于 
      Now, NUMA balancing can only optimize the page placement among the NUMA
nodes if the default memory policy is used.  Because the memory policy
specified explicitly should take precedence.  But this seems too strict in
some situations.  For example, on a system with 4 NUMA nodes, if the
memory of an application is bound to the node 0 and 1, NUMA balancing can
potentially migrate the pages between the node 0 and 1 to reduce
cross-node accessing without breaking the explicit memory binding policy.

So in this patch, we add MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING mode flag to
set_mempolicy() when mode is MPOL_BIND.  With the flag specified, NUMA
balancing will be enabled within the thread to optimize the page placement
within the constrains of the specified memory binding policy.  With the
newly added flag, the NUMA balancing control mechanism becomes,

 - sysctl knob numa_balancing can enable/disable the NUMA balancing
   globally.

 - even if sysctl numa_balancing is enabled, the NUMA balancing will be
   disabled for the memory areas or applications with the explicit
   memory policy by default.

 - MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING can be used to enable the NUMA balancing for
   the applications when specifying the explicit memory policy
   (MPOL_BIND).

Various page placement optimization based on the NUMA balancing can be
done with these flags.  As the first step, in this patch, if the memory of
the application is bound to multiple nodes (MPOL_BIND), and in the hint
page fault handler the accessing node are in the policy nodemask, the page
will be tried to be migrated to the accessing node to reduce the
cross-node accessing.

If the newly added MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING flag is specified by an
application on an old kernel version without its support, set_mempolicy()
will return -1 and errno will be set to EINVAL.  The application can use
this behavior to run on both old and new kernel versions.

And if the MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING flag is specified for the mode other than
MPOL_BIND, set_mempolicy() will return -1 and errno will be set to EINVAL
as before.  Because we don't support optimization based on the NUMA
balancing for these modes.

In the previous version of the patch, we tried to reuse MPOL_MF_LAZY for
mbind().  But that flag is tied to MPOL_MF_MOVE.*, so it seems not a good
API/ABI for the purpose of the patch.

And because it's not clear whether it's necessary to enable NUMA balancing
for a specific memory area inside an application, so we only add the flag
at the thread level (set_mempolicy()) instead of the memory area level
(mbind()).  We can do that when it become necessary.

To test the patch, we run a test case as follows on a 4-node machine with
192 GB memory (48 GB per node).

1. Change pmbench memory accessing benchmark to call set_mempolicy()
   to bind its memory to node 1 and 3 and enable NUMA balancing.  Some
   related code snippets are as follows,

     #include <numaif.h>
     #include <numa.h>

	struct bitmask *bmp;
	int ret;

	bmp = numa_parse_nodestring("1,3");
	ret = set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND | MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING,
			    bmp->maskp, bmp->size + 1);
	/* If MPOL_F_NUMA_BALANCING isn't supported, fall back to MPOL_BIND */
	if (ret < 0 && errno == EINVAL)
		ret = set_mempolicy(MPOL_BIND, bmp->maskp, bmp->size + 1);
	if (ret < 0) {
		perror("Failed to call set_mempolicy");
		exit(-1);
	}

2. Run a memory eater on node 3 to use 40 GB memory before running pmbench.

3. Run pmbench with 64 processes, the working-set size of each process
   is 640 MB, so the total working-set size is 64 * 640 MB = 40 GB.  The
   CPU and the memory (as in step 1.) of all pmbench processes is bound
   to node 1 and 3. So, after CPU usage is balanced, some pmbench
   processes run on the CPUs of the node 3 will access the memory of
   the node 1.

4. After the pmbench processes run for 100 seconds, kill the memory
   eater.  Now it's possible for some pmbench processes to migrate
   their pages from node 1 to node 3 to reduce cross-node accessing.

Test results show that, with the patch, the pages can be migrated from
node 1 to node 3 after killing the memory eater, and the pmbench score
can increase about 17.5%.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210120061235.148637-2-ying.huang@intel.comSigned-off-by: N"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Acked-by: NMel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      bda420b9
  15. 13 1月, 2021 1 次提交
  17. 16 12月, 2020 1 次提交
  19. 03 11月, 2020 1 次提交
  21. 14 10月, 2020 2 次提交
  23. 15 8月, 2020 1 次提交
  25. 13 8月, 2020 5 次提交
  27. 17 7月, 2020 1 次提交
  29. 10 6月, 2020 2 次提交