Linux-Kernel Archive: Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces From: Alistair Popple Date: Thu May 05 2022 - 20:02:16 EST Next message: Ian Rogers: "Re: [PATCH V1 16/23] perf intel-pt: Track sideband system-wide when needed" Previous message: Ian Rogers: "Re: [PATCH V1 15/23] perf intel-pt: Use evlist__add_system_wide_dummy() for switch tracking" In reply to: ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx: "Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces" Next in thread: Alistair Popple: "Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces" Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Wei Xu writes: > The current kernel has the basic memory tiering support: Inactive > pages on a higher tier NUMA node can be migrated (demoted) to a lower > tier NUMA node to make room for new allocations on the higher tier > NUMA node. Frequently accessed pages on a lower tier NUMA node can be > migrated (promoted) to a higher tier NUMA node to improve the > performance. > > A tiering relationship between NUMA nodes in the form of demotion path > is created during the kernel initialization and updated when a NUMA > node is hot-added or hot-removed. The current implementation puts all > nodes with CPU into the top tier, and then builds the tiering hierarchy > tier-by-tier by establishing the per-node demotion targets based on > the distances between nodes. > > The current memory tiering interface needs to be improved to address > several important use cases: > > * The current tiering initialization code always initializes > each memory-only NUMA node into a lower tier. But a memory-only > NUMA node may have a high performance memory device (e.g. a DRAM > device attached via CXL.mem or a DRAM-backed memory-only node on > a virtual machine) and should be put into the top tier. > > * The current tiering hierarchy always puts CPU nodes into the top > tier. But on a system with HBM (e.g. GPU memory) devices, these > memory-only HBM NUMA nodes should be in the top tier, and DRAM nodes > with CPUs are better to be placed into the next lower tier. > > * Also because the current tiering hierarchy always puts CPU nodes > into the top tier, when a CPU is hot-added (or hot-removed) and > triggers a memory node from CPU-less into a CPU node (or vice > versa), the memory tiering hierarchy gets changed, even though no > memory node is added or removed. This can make the tiering > hierarchy much less stable. > > * A higher tier node can only be demoted to selected nodes on the > next lower tier, not any other node from the next lower tier. This > strict, hard-coded demotion order does not work in all use cases > (e.g. some use cases may want to allow cross-socket demotion to > another node in the same demotion tier as a fallback when the > preferred demotion node is out of space), and has resulted in the > feature request for an interface to override the system-wide, > per-node demotion order from the userspace. > > * There are no interfaces for the userspace to learn about the memory > tiering hierarchy in order to optimize its memory allocations. > > I'd like to propose revised memory tiering kernel interfaces based on > the discussions in the threads: > > - > - > > > Sysfs Interfaces > `==============' > > * /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers > > Format: node list (one tier per line, in the tier order) > > When read, list memory nodes by tiers. > > When written (one tier per line), take the user-provided node-tier > assignment as the new tiering hierarchy and rebuild the per-node > demotion order. It is allowed to only override the top tiers, in > which cases, the kernel will establish the lower tiers automatically. > > > Kernel Representation > `===================' > > * nodemask_t node_states[N_TOPTIER_MEMORY] > > Store all top-tier memory nodes. > > * nodemask_t memory_tiers[MAX_TIERS] > > Store memory nodes by tiers. > > * struct demotion_nodes node_demotion[] > > where: struct demotion_nodes { nodemask_t preferred; nodemask_t allowed; } > > For a node N: > > node_demotion[N].preferred lists all preferred demotion targets; > > node_demotion[N].allowed lists all allowed demotion targets > (initialized to be all the nodes in the same demotion tier). > > > Tiering Hierarchy Initialization > `==============================' > > By default, all memory nodes are in the top tier (N_TOPTIER_MEMORY). > > A device driver can remove its memory nodes from the top tier, e.g. > a dax driver can remove PMEM nodes from the top tier. > > The kernel builds the memory tiering hierarchy and per-node demotion > order tier-by-tier starting from N_TOPTIER_MEMORY. For a node N, the > best distance nodes in the next lower tier are assigned to > node_demotion[N].preferred and all the nodes in the next lower tier > are assigned to node_demotion[N].allowed. > > node_demotion[N].preferred can be empty if no preferred demotion node > is available for node N. > > If the userspace overrides the tiers via the memory_tiers sysfs > interface, the kernel then only rebuilds the per-node demotion order > accordingly. > > 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. > > > Memory Allocation for Demotion > `============================' > > When allocating a new demotion target page, both a preferred node > and the allowed nodemask are provided to the allocation function. > The default kernel allocation fallback order is used to allocate the > page from the specified node and nodemask. > > The memopolicy of cpuset, vma and owner task of the source page can > be set to refine the demotion nodemask, e.g. to prevent demotion or > select a particular allowed node as the demotion target. > > > Examples > `======' > > * Example 1: > Node 0 & 1 are DRAM nodes, node 2 & 3 are PMEM nodes. > > Node 0 has node 2 as the preferred demotion target and can also > fallback demotion to node 3. > > Node 1 has node 3 as the preferred demotion target and can also > fallback demotion to node 2. > > Set mempolicy to prevent cross-socket demotion and memory access, > e.g. cpuset.mems=0,2 > > node distances: > node 0 1 2 3 > 0 10 20 30 40 > 1 20 10 40 30 > 2 30 40 10 40 > 3 40 30 40 10 > > /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers > 0-1 > 2-3 > > N_TOPTIER_MEMORY: 0-1 > > node_demotion[]: > 0: [2], [2-3] > 1: [3], [2-3] > 2: [], [] > 3: [], [] > > * Example 2: > Node 0 & 1 are DRAM nodes. > Node 2 is a PMEM node and closer to node 0. > > Node 0 has node 2 as the preferred and only demotion target. > > Node 1 has no preferred demotion target, but can still demote > to node 2. > > Set mempolicy to prevent cross-socket demotion and memory access, > e.g. cpuset.mems=0,2 > > node distances: > node 0 1 2 > 0 10 20 30 > 1 20 10 40 > 2 30 40 10 > > /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers > 0-1 > 2 > > N_TOPTIER_MEMORY: 0-1 > > node_demotion[]: > 0: [2], [2] > 1: [], [2] > 2: [], [] > > > * Example 3: > Node 0 & 1 are DRAM nodes. > Node 2 is a PMEM node and has the same distance to node 0 & 1. > > Node 0 has node 2 as the preferred and only demotion target. > > Node 1 has node 2 as the preferred and only demotion target. > > node distances: > node 0 1 2 > 0 10 20 30 > 1 20 10 30 > 2 30 30 10 > > /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers > 0-1 > 2 > > N_TOPTIER_MEMORY: 0-1 > > node_demotion[]: > 0: [2], [2] > 1: [2], [2] > 2: [], [] > > > * Example 4: > Node 0 & 1 are DRAM nodes, Node 2 is a memory-only DRAM node. > > All nodes are top-tier. > > node distances: > node 0 1 2 > 0 10 20 30 > 1 20 10 30 > 2 30 30 10 > > /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers > 0-2 > > N_TOPTIER_MEMORY: 0-2 > > node_demotion[]: > 0: [], [] > 1: [], [] > 2: [], [] > > > * Example 5: > Node 0 is a DRAM node with CPU. > Node 1 is a HBM node. > Node 2 is a PMEM node. > > With userspace override, node 1 is the top tier and has node 0 as > the preferred and only demotion target. > > Node 0 is in the second tier, tier 1, and has node 2 as the > preferred and only demotion target. > > Node 2 is in the lowest tier, tier 2, and has no demotion targets. > > node distances: > node 0 1 2 > 0 10 21 30 > 1 21 10 40 > 2 30 40 10 > > /sys/devices/system/node/memory_tiers (userspace override) > 1 > 0 > 2 > > N_TOPTIER_MEMORY: 1 > > node_demotion[]: > 0: [2], [2] > 1: [0], [0] > 2: [], [] > > -- Wei Next message: Ian Rogers: "Re: [PATCH V1 16/23] perf intel-pt: Track sideband system-wide when needed" Previous message: Ian Rogers: "Re: [PATCH V1 15/23] perf intel-pt: Use evlist__add_system_wide_dummy() for switch tracking" In reply to: ying.huang@xxxxxxxxx: "Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces" Next in thread: Alistair Popple: "Re: RFC: Memory Tiering Kernel Interfaces" Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
