[PATCH v5 0/4] mm/mempolicy: weighted interleave mempolicy and sysfs extension

[PATCH v5 0/4] mm/mempolicy: weighted interleave mempolicy and sysfs extension

[Gregory Price]

(v5: style, retry interleave w/ mems_allowed cookie
     fix sparse warnings, style, review tags)

-----

Weighted interleave is a new interleave policy intended to make
use of heterogeneous memory environments appearing with CXL.

The existing interleave mechanism does an even round-robin
distribution of memory across all nodes in a nodemask, while
weighted interleave distributes memory across nodes according
to a provided weight. (Weight = # of page allocations per round)

Weighted interleave is intended to reduce average latency when
bandwidth is pressured - therefore increasing total throughput.

In other words: It allows greater use of the total available
bandwidth in a heterogeneous hardware environment (different
hardware provides different bandwidth capacity).

As bandwidth is pressured, latency increases - first linearly
and then exponentially. By keeping bandwidth usage distributed
according to available bandwidth, we therefore can reduce the
average latency of a cacheline fetch.

A good explanation of the bandwidth vs latency response curve:
https://mahmoudhatem.wordpress.com/2017/11/07/memory-bandwidth-vs-latency-response-curve/

From the article:
```
Constant region:
    The latency response is fairly constant for the first 40%
    of the sustained bandwidth.
Linear region:
    In between 40% to 80% of the sustained bandwidth, the
    latency response increases almost linearly with the bandwidth
    demand of the system due to contention overhead by numerous
    memory requests.
Exponential region:
    Between 80% to 100% of the sustained bandwidth, the memory
    latency is dominated by the contention latency which can be
    as much as twice the idle latency or more.
Maximum sustained bandwidth :
    Is 65% to 75% of the theoretical maximum bandwidth.
```

As a general rule of thumb:
* If bandwidth usage is low, latency does not increase. It is
  optimal to place data in the nearest (lowest latency) device.
* If bandwidth usage is high, latency increases. It is optimal
  to place data such that bandwidth use is optimized per-device.

This is the top line goal: Provide a user a mechanism to target using
the "maximum sustained bandwidth" of each hardware component in a
heterogenous memory system.


For example, the stream benchmark demonstrates that 1:1 (default)
interleave is actively harmful, while weighted interleave can be
beneficial. Default interleave distributes data such that too much
pressure is placed on devices with lower available bandwidth.

Stream Benchmark (vs DRAM, 1 Socket + 1 CXL Device)
Default interleave : -78% (slower than DRAM)
Global weighting   : -6% to +4% (workload dependant)
Targeted weights   : +2.5% to +4% (consistently better than DRAM)

Global means the task-policy was set (set_mempolicy), while targeted
means VMA policies were set (mbind2). We see weighted interleave
is not always beneficial when applied globally, but is always
beneficial when applied to bandwidth-driving memory regions.


There are 4 patches in this set:
1) Implement system-global interleave weights as sysfs extension
   in mm/mempolicy.c.  These weights are RCU protected, and a
   default weight set is provided (all weights are 1 by default).

   In future work, we intend to expose an interface for HMAT/CDAT
   code to set reasonable default values based on the memory
   configuration of the system discovered at boot/hotplug.

2) A mild refactor of some interleave-logic for re-use in the
   new weighted interleave logic.

3) MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE extension for set_mempolicy/mbind

4) Protect interleave logic (weighted and normal) with the
   mems_allowed seq cookie.  If the nodemask changes while
   accessing it during a rebind, just retry the access.

Included below are some performance and LTP test information,
and a sample numactl branch which can be used for testing.

= Performance summary =
(tests may have different configurations, see extended info below)
1) MLC (W2) : +38% over DRAM. +264% over default interleave.
   MLC (W5) : +40% over DRAM. +226% over default interleave.
2) Stream   : -6% to +4% over DRAM, +430% over default interleave.
3) XSBench  : +19% over DRAM. +47% over default interleave.

= LTP Testing Summary =
existing mempolicy & mbind tests: pass
mempolicy & mbind + weighted interleave (global weights): pass

= version history
v5:
- style fixes
- mems_allowed cookie protection to detect rebind issues,
  prevents spurious allocation failures and/or mis-allocations
- sparse warning fixes related to __rcu on local variables

=====================================================================
Performance tests - MLC
From - Ravi Jonnalagadda <ravis.opensrc@micron.com>

Hardware: Single-socket, multiple CXL memory expanders.

Workload:                               W2
Data Signature:                         2:1 read:write
DRAM only bandwidth (GBps):             298.8
DRAM + CXL (default interleave) (GBps): 113.04
DRAM + CXL (weighted interleave)(GBps): 412.5
Gain over DRAM only:                    1.38x
Gain over default interleave:           2.64x

Workload:                               W5
Data Signature:                         1:1 read:write
DRAM only bandwidth (GBps):             273.2
DRAM + CXL (default interleave) (GBps): 117.23
DRAM + CXL (weighted interleave)(GBps): 382.7
Gain over DRAM only:                    1.4x
Gain over default interleave:           2.26x

=====================================================================
Performance test - Stream
From - Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>

Hardware: Single socket, single CXL expander
numactl extension: https://github.com/gmprice/numactl/tree/weighted_interleave_master

Summary: 64 threads, ~18GB workload, 3GB per array, executed 100 times
Default interleave : -78% (slower than DRAM)
Global weighting   : -6% to +4% (workload dependant)
mbind2 weights     : +2.5% to +4% (consistently better than DRAM)

dram only:
numactl --cpunodebind=1 --membind=1 ./stream_c.exe --ntimes 100 --array-size 400M --malloc
Function     Direction    BestRateMBs     AvgTime      MinTime      MaxTime
Copy:        0->0            200923.2     0.032662     0.031853     0.033301
Scale:       0->0            202123.0     0.032526     0.031664     0.032970
Add:         0->0            208873.2     0.047322     0.045961     0.047884
Triad:       0->0            208523.8     0.047262     0.046038     0.048414

CXL-only:
numactl --cpunodebind=1 -w --membind=2 ./stream_c.exe --ntimes 100 --array-size 400M --malloc
Copy:        0->0             22209.7     0.288661     0.288162     0.289342
Scale:       0->0             22288.2     0.287549     0.287147     0.288291
Add:         0->0             24419.1     0.393372     0.393135     0.393735
Triad:       0->0             24484.6     0.392337     0.392083     0.394331

Based on the above, the optimal weights are ~9:1
echo 9 > /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/node1
echo 1 > /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/node2

default interleave:
numactl --cpunodebind=1 --interleave=1,2 ./stream_c.exe --ntimes 100 --array-size 400M --malloc
Copy:        0->0             44666.2     0.143671     0.143285     0.144174
Scale:       0->0             44781.6     0.143256     0.142916     0.143713
Add:         0->0             48600.7     0.197719     0.197528     0.197858
Triad:       0->0             48727.5     0.197204     0.197014     0.197439

global weighted interleave:
numactl --cpunodebind=1 -w --interleave=1,2 ./stream_c.exe --ntimes 100 --array-size 400M --malloc
Copy:        0->0            190085.9     0.034289     0.033669     0.034645
Scale:       0->0            207677.4     0.031909     0.030817     0.033061
Add:         0->0            202036.8     0.048737     0.047516     0.053409
Triad:       0->0            217671.5     0.045819     0.044103     0.046755

targted regions w/ global weights (modified stream to mbind2 malloc'd regions))
numactl --cpunodebind=1 --membind=1 ./stream_c.exe -b --ntimes 100 --array-size 400M --malloc
Copy:        0->0            205827.0     0.031445     0.031094     0.031984
Scale:       0->0            208171.8     0.031320     0.030744     0.032505
Add:         0->0            217352.0     0.045087     0.044168     0.046515
Triad:       0->0            216884.8     0.045062     0.044263     0.046982

=====================================================================
Performance tests - XSBench
From - Hyeongtak Ji <hyeongtak.ji@sk.com>

Hardware: Single socket, Single CXL memory Expander

NUMA node 0: 56 logical cores, 128 GB memory
NUMA node 2: 96 GB CXL memory
Threads:     56
Lookups:     170,000,000

Summary: +19% over DRAM. +47% over default interleave.

Performance tests - XSBench
1. dram only
$ numactl -m 0 ./XSBench -s XL –p 5000000
Runtime:     36.235 seconds
Lookups/s:   4,691,618

2. default interleave
$ numactl –i 0,2 ./XSBench –s XL –p 5000000
Runtime:     55.243 seconds
Lookups/s:   3,077,293

3. weighted interleave
numactl –w –i 0,2 ./XSBench –s XL –p 5000000
Runtime:     29.262 seconds
Lookups/s:   5,809,513

=====================================================================
LTP Tests: https://github.com/gmprice/ltp/tree/mempolicy2

= Existing tests
set_mempolicy, get_mempolicy, mbind

MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE added manually to test basic functionality
but did not adjust tests for weighting.  Basically the weights were
set to 1, which is the default, and it should behave the same as
MPOL_INTERLEAVE if logic is correct.

== set_mempolicy01 : passed   18, failed   0
== set_mempolicy02 : passed   10, failed   0
== set_mempolicy03 : passed   64, failed   0
== set_mempolicy04 : passed   32, failed   0
== set_mempolicy05 - n/a on non-x86
== set_mempolicy06 : passed   10, failed   0
   this is set_mempolicy02 + MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== set_mempolicy07 : passed   32, failed   0
   set_mempolicy04 + MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== get_mempolicy01 : passed   12, failed   0
   change: added MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== get_mempolicy02 : passed   2, failed   0
== mbind01 : passed   15, failed   0
   added MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== mbind02 : passed   4, failed   0
   added MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== mbind03 : passed   16, failed   0
   added MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE
== mbind04 : passed   48, failed   0
   added MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE

=====================================================================
numactl (set_mempolicy) w/ global weighting test
numactl fork: https://github.com/gmprice/numactl/tree/weighted_interleave_master

command: numactl -w --interleave=0,1 ./eatmem

result (weights 1:1):
0176a000 weighted interleave:0-1 heap anon=65793 dirty=65793 active=0 N0=32897 N1=32896 kernelpagesize_kB=4
7fceeb9ff000 weighted interleave:0-1 anon=65537 dirty=65537 active=0 N0=32768 N1=32769 kernelpagesize_kB=4
50% distribution is correct

result (weights 5:1):
01b14000 weighted interleave:0-1 heap anon=65793 dirty=65793 active=0 N0=54828 N1=10965 kernelpagesize_kB=4
7f47a1dff000 weighted interleave:0-1 anon=65537 dirty=65537 active=0 N0=54614 N1=10923 kernelpagesize_kB=4
16.666% distribution is correct

result (weights 1:5):
01f07000 weighted interleave:0-1 heap anon=65793 dirty=65793 active=0 N0=10966 N1=54827 kernelpagesize_kB=4
7f17b1dff000 weighted interleave:0-1 anon=65537 dirty=65537 active=0 N0=10923 N1=54614 kernelpagesize_kB=4
16.666% distribution is correct

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
int main (void)
{
        char* mem = malloc(1024*1024*256);
        memset(mem, 1, 1024*1024*256);
        for (int i = 0; i  < ((1024*1024*256)/4096); i++)
        {
                mem = malloc(4096);
                mem[0] = 1;
        }
        printf("done\n");
        getchar();
        return 0;
}

=====================================================================

Suggested-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
Suggested-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Suggested-by: Hasan Al Maruf <hasanalmaruf@fb.com>
Suggested-by: Hao Wang <haowang3@fb.com>
Suggested-by: Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Suggested-by: Zhongkun He <hezhongkun.hzk@bytedance.com>
Suggested-by: Frank van der Linden <fvdl@google.com>
Suggested-by: John Groves <john@jagalactic.com>
Suggested-by: Vinicius Tavares Petrucci <vtavarespetr@micron.com>
Suggested-by: Srinivasulu Thanneeru <sthanneeru@micron.com>
Suggested-by: Ravi Jonnalagadda <ravis.opensrc@micron.com>
Suggested-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Suggested-by: Hyeongtak Ji <hyeongtak.ji@sk.com>
Suggested-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>

Gregory Price (3):
  mm/mempolicy: refactor a read-once mechanism into a function for
    re-use
  mm/mempolicy: introduce MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE for weighted
    interleaving
  mm/mempolicy: protect task interleave functions with
    tsk->mems_allowed_seq

Rakie Kim (1):
  mm/mempolicy: implement the sysfs-based weighted_interleave interface

 .../ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy     |   4 +
 ...fs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave |  25 +
 .../admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst     |   9 +
 include/linux/sched.h                         |   1 +
 include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h                |   1 +
 mm/mempolicy.c                                | 488 +++++++++++++++++-
 6 files changed, 513 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy
 create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave

-- 
2.39.1

[PATCH v5 1/4] mm/mempolicy: implement the sysfs-based weighted_interleave interface

[Gregory Price]

From: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>

This patch provides a way to set interleave weight information under
sysfs at /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/nodeN

The sysfs structure is designed as follows.

  $ tree /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/
  /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/ [1]
  └── weighted_interleave [2]
      ├── node0 [3]
      └── node1

Each file above can be explained as follows.

[1] mm/mempolicy: configuration interface for mempolicy subsystem

[2] weighted_interleave/: config interface for weighted interleave policy

[3] weighted_interleave/nodeN: weight for nodeN

If a node value is set to `0`, the system-default value will be used.
As of this patch, the system-default for all nodes is always 1.

Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@sk.com>
Signed-off-by: Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@sk.com>
Co-developed-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
Co-developed-by: Hyeongtak Ji <hyeongtak.ji@sk.com>
Signed-off-by: Hyeongtak Ji <hyeongtak.ji@sk.com>
Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
---
 .../ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy     |   4 +
 ...fs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave |  25 ++
 mm/mempolicy.c                                | 223 ++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 252 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy
 create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave

diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..8ac327fd7fb6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+What:		/sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/
+Date:		January 2024
+Contact:	Linux memory management mailing list <linux-mm@kvack.org>
+Description:	Interface for Mempolicy
diff --git a/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..0b7972de04e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-mm-mempolicy-weighted-interleave
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+What:		/sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/
+Date:		January 2024
+Contact:	Linux memory management mailing list <linux-mm@kvack.org>
+Description:	Configuration Interface for the Weighted Interleave policy
+
+What:		/sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/nodeN
+Date:		January 2024
+Contact:	Linux memory management mailing list <linux-mm@kvack.org>
+Description:	Weight configuration interface for nodeN
+
+		The interleave weight for a memory node (N). These weights are
+		utilized by tasks which have set their mempolicy to
+		MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE.
+
+		These weights only affect new allocations, and changes at runtime
+		will not cause migrations on already allocated pages.
+
+		The minimum weight for a node is always 1.
+
+		Minimum weight: 1
+		Maximum weight: 255
+
+		Writing an empty string or `0` will reset the weight to the
+		system default. The system default may be set by the kernel
+		or drivers at boot or during hotplug events.
diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index 10a590ee1c89..41e58c4c0d01 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -131,6 +131,32 @@ static struct mempolicy default_policy = {
 
 static struct mempolicy preferred_node_policy[MAX_NUMNODES];
 
+/*
+ * iw_table is the sysfs-set interleave weight table, a value of 0 denotes
+ * system-default value should be used. A NULL iw_table also denotes that
+ * system-default values should be used. Until the system-default table
+ * is implemented, the system-default is always 1.
+ *
+ * iw_table is RCU protected
+ */
+static u8 __rcu *iw_table;
+static DEFINE_MUTEX(iw_table_lock);
+
+static u8 get_il_weight(int node)
+{
+	u8 *table;
+	u8 weight;
+
+	rcu_read_lock();
+	table = rcu_dereference(iw_table);
+	/* if no iw_table, use system default */
+	weight = table ? table[node] : 1;
+	/* if value in iw_table is 0, use system default */
+	weight = weight ? weight : 1;
+	rcu_read_unlock();
+	return weight;
+}
+
 /**
  * numa_nearest_node - Find nearest node by state
  * @node: Node id to start the search
@@ -3067,3 +3093,200 @@ void mpol_to_str(char *buffer, int maxlen, struct mempolicy *pol)
 		p += scnprintf(p, buffer + maxlen - p, ":%*pbl",
 			       nodemask_pr_args(&nodes));
 }
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_SYSFS
+struct iw_node_attr {
+	struct kobj_attribute kobj_attr;
+	int nid;
+};
+
+static ssize_t node_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,
+			 char *buf)
+{
+	struct iw_node_attr *node_attr;
+	u8 weight;
+
+	node_attr = container_of(attr, struct iw_node_attr, kobj_attr);
+	weight = get_il_weight(node_attr->nid);
+	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%d\n", weight);
+}
+
+static ssize_t node_store(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,
+			  const char *buf, size_t count)
+{
+	struct iw_node_attr *node_attr;
+	u8 *new;
+	u8 *old;
+	u8 weight = 0;
+
+	node_attr = container_of(attr, struct iw_node_attr, kobj_attr);
+	if (count == 0 || sysfs_streq(buf, ""))
+		weight = 0;
+	else if (kstrtou8(buf, 0, &weight))
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	new = kzalloc(nr_node_ids, GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!new)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	mutex_lock(&iw_table_lock);
+	old = rcu_dereference_protected(iw_table,
+					lockdep_is_held(&iw_table_lock));
+	if (old)
+		memcpy(new, old, nr_node_ids);
+	new[node_attr->nid] = weight;
+	rcu_assign_pointer(iw_table, new);
+	mutex_unlock(&iw_table_lock);
+	synchronize_rcu();
+	kfree(old);
+	return count;
+}
+
+static struct iw_node_attr **node_attrs;
+
+static void sysfs_wi_node_release(struct iw_node_attr *node_attr,
+				  struct kobject *parent)
+{
+	if (!node_attr)
+		return;
+	sysfs_remove_file(parent, &node_attr->kobj_attr.attr);
+	kfree(node_attr->kobj_attr.attr.name);
+	kfree(node_attr);
+}
+
+static void sysfs_wi_release(struct kobject *wi_kobj)
+{
+	int i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < nr_node_ids; i++)
+		sysfs_wi_node_release(node_attrs[i], wi_kobj);
+	kobject_put(wi_kobj);
+}
+
+static const struct kobj_type wi_ktype = {
+	.sysfs_ops = &kobj_sysfs_ops,
+	.release = sysfs_wi_release,
+};
+
+static int add_weight_node(int nid, struct kobject *wi_kobj)
+{
+	struct iw_node_attr *node_attr;
+	char *name;
+
+	node_attr = kzalloc(sizeof(*node_attr), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!node_attr)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "node%d", nid);
+	if (!name) {
+		kfree(node_attr);
+		return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+
+	sysfs_attr_init(&node_attr->kobj_attr.attr);
+	node_attr->kobj_attr.attr.name = name;
+	node_attr->kobj_attr.attr.mode = 0644;
+	node_attr->kobj_attr.show = node_show;
+	node_attr->kobj_attr.store = node_store;
+	node_attr->nid = nid;
+
+	if (sysfs_create_file(wi_kobj, &node_attr->kobj_attr.attr)) {
+		kfree(node_attr->kobj_attr.attr.name);
+		kfree(node_attr);
+		pr_err("failed to add attribute to weighted_interleave\n");
+		return -ENOMEM;
+	}
+
+	node_attrs[nid] = node_attr;
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int add_weighted_interleave_group(struct kobject *root_kobj)
+{
+	struct kobject *wi_kobj;
+	int nid, err;
+
+	wi_kobj = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kobject), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!wi_kobj)
+		return -ENOMEM;
+
+	err = kobject_init_and_add(wi_kobj, &wi_ktype, root_kobj,
+				   "weighted_interleave");
+	if (err) {
+		kfree(wi_kobj);
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	for_each_node_state(nid, N_POSSIBLE) {
+		err = add_weight_node(nid, wi_kobj);
+		if (err) {
+			pr_err("failed to add sysfs [node%d]\n", nid);
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+	if (err)
+		kobject_put(wi_kobj);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static void mempolicy_kobj_release(struct kobject *kobj)
+{
+	u8 *old;
+
+	mutex_lock(&iw_table_lock);
+	old = rcu_dereference_protected(iw_table,
+					lockdep_is_held(&iw_table_lock));
+	rcu_assign_pointer(iw_table, NULL);
+	mutex_unlock(&iw_table_lock);
+	synchronize_rcu();
+	kfree(old);
+	kfree(node_attrs);
+	kfree(kobj);
+}
+
+static const struct kobj_type mempolicy_ktype = {
+	.release = mempolicy_kobj_release
+};
+
+static int __init mempolicy_sysfs_init(void)
+{
+	int err;
+	static struct kobject *mempolicy_kobj;
+
+	mempolicy_kobj = kzalloc(sizeof(*mempolicy_kobj), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!mempolicy_kobj) {
+		err = -ENOMEM;
+		goto err_out;
+	}
+
+	node_attrs = kcalloc(nr_node_ids, sizeof(struct iw_node_attr *),
+			     GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!node_attrs) {
+		err = -ENOMEM;
+		goto mempol_out;
+	}
+
+	err = kobject_init_and_add(mempolicy_kobj, &mempolicy_ktype, mm_kobj,
+				   "mempolicy");
+	if (err)
+		goto node_out;
+
+	err = add_weighted_interleave_group(mempolicy_kobj);
+	if (err) {
+		pr_err("mempolicy sysfs structure failed to initialize\n");
+		kobject_put(mempolicy_kobj);
+		return err;
+	}
+
+	return err;
+node_out:
+	kfree(node_attrs);
+mempol_out:
+	kfree(mempolicy_kobj);
+err_out:
+	pr_err("failed to add mempolicy kobject to the system\n");
+	return err;
+}
+
+late_initcall(mempolicy_sysfs_init);
+#endif /* CONFIG_SYSFS */
-- 
2.39.1

[PATCH v5 2/4] mm/mempolicy: refactor a read-once mechanism into a function for re-use

[Gregory Price]

move the use of barrier() to force policy->nodemask onto the stack into
a function `read_once_policy_nodemask` so that it may be re-used.

Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
---
 mm/mempolicy.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index 41e58c4c0d01..697f2a791c24 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1909,6 +1909,20 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void)
 	}
 }
 
+static unsigned int read_once_policy_nodemask(struct mempolicy *pol,
+					      nodemask_t *mask)
+{
+	/*
+	 * barrier stabilizes the nodemask locally so that it can be iterated
+	 * over safely without concern for changes. Allocators validate node
+	 * selection does not violate mems_allowed, so this is safe.
+	 */
+	barrier();
+	memcpy(mask, &pol->nodes, sizeof(nodemask_t));
+	barrier();
+	return nodes_weight(*mask);
+}
+
 /*
  * Do static interleaving for interleave index @ilx.  Returns the ilx'th
  * node in pol->nodes (starting from ilx=0), wrapping around if ilx
@@ -1916,20 +1930,12 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void)
  */
 static unsigned int interleave_nid(struct mempolicy *pol, pgoff_t ilx)
 {
-	nodemask_t nodemask = pol->nodes;
+	nodemask_t nodemask;
 	unsigned int target, nnodes;
 	int i;
 	int nid;
-	/*
-	 * The barrier will stabilize the nodemask in a register or on
-	 * the stack so that it will stop changing under the code.
-	 *
-	 * Between first_node() and next_node(), pol->nodes could be changed
-	 * by other threads. So we put pol->nodes in a local stack.
-	 */
-	barrier();
 
-	nnodes = nodes_weight(nodemask);
+	nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodemask);
 	if (!nnodes)
 		return numa_node_id();
 	target = ilx % nnodes;
-- 
2.39.1

[PATCH v5 4/4] mm/mempolicy: protect task interleave functions with tsk->mems_allowed_seq

[Gregory Price]

In the event of rebind, pol->nodemask can change at the same time as an
allocation occurs.  We can detect this with tsk->mems_allowed_seq and
prevent a miscount or an allocation failure from occurring.

The same thing happens in the allocators to detect failure, but this
can prevent spurious failures in a much smaller critical section.

Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
---
 mm/mempolicy.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
index d8cc3a577986..ed0d5d2d456a 100644
--- a/mm/mempolicy.c
+++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
@@ -1878,11 +1878,17 @@ bool apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone)
 
 static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
 {
-	unsigned int node = current->il_prev;
-
-	if (!current->il_weight || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
+	unsigned int node;
+	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
+
+retry:
+	/* to prevent miscount use tsk->mems_allowed_seq to detect rebind */
+	cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
+	node = current->il_prev;
+	if (!node || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
 		node = next_node_in(node, policy->nodes);
-		/* can only happen if nodemask is being rebound */
+		if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
+			goto retry;
 		if (node == MAX_NUMNODES)
 			return node;
 		current->il_prev = node;
@@ -1896,8 +1902,14 @@ static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
 static unsigned int interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
 {
 	unsigned int nid;
+	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
+
+	/* to prevent miscount, use tsk->mems_allowed_seq to detect rebind */
+	do {
+		cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
+		nid = next_node_in(current->il_prev, policy->nodes);
+	} while (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie));
 
-	nid = next_node_in(current->il_prev, policy->nodes);
 	if (nid < MAX_NUMNODES)
 		current->il_prev = nid;
 	return nid;
@@ -2374,6 +2386,7 @@ static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave(gfp_t gfp,
 		struct page **page_array)
 {
 	struct task_struct *me = current;
+	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
 	unsigned long total_allocated = 0;
 	unsigned long nr_allocated = 0;
 	unsigned long rounds;
@@ -2391,7 +2404,13 @@ static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave(gfp_t gfp,
 	if (!nr_pages)
 		return 0;
 
-	nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodes);
+	/* read the nodes onto the stack, retry if done during rebind */
+	do {
+		cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
+		nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodes);
+	} while (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie));
+
+	/* if the nodemask has become invalid, we cannot do anything */
 	if (!nnodes)
 		return 0;
 
-- 
2.39.1

Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm/mempolicy: protect task interleave functions with tsk->mems_allowed_seq

[Huang, Ying]

Gregory Price <gourry.memverge@gmail.com> writes:

> In the event of rebind, pol->nodemask can change at the same time as an
> allocation occurs.  We can detect this with tsk->mems_allowed_seq and
> prevent a miscount or an allocation failure from occurring.
>
> The same thing happens in the allocators to detect failure, but this
> can prevent spurious failures in a much smaller critical section.
>
> Suggested-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Price <gregory.price@memverge.com>
> ---
>  mm/mempolicy.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index d8cc3a577986..ed0d5d2d456a 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -1878,11 +1878,17 @@ bool apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone)
>  
>  static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
>  {
> -	unsigned int node = current->il_prev;
> -
> -	if (!current->il_weight || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
> +	unsigned int node;
> +	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
> +
> +retry:
> +	/* to prevent miscount use tsk->mems_allowed_seq to detect rebind */
> +	cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
> +	node = current->il_prev;
> +	if (!node || !node_isset(node, policy->nodes)) {
            ~~~~~
            !current->il_weight ?

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

>  		node = next_node_in(node, policy->nodes);
> -		/* can only happen if nodemask is being rebound */
> +		if (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie))
> +			goto retry;
>  		if (node == MAX_NUMNODES)
>  			return node;
>  		current->il_prev = node;
> @@ -1896,8 +1902,14 @@ static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
>  static unsigned int interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy)
>  {
>  	unsigned int nid;
> +	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
> +
> +	/* to prevent miscount, use tsk->mems_allowed_seq to detect rebind */
> +	do {
> +		cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
> +		nid = next_node_in(current->il_prev, policy->nodes);
> +	} while (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie));
>  
> -	nid = next_node_in(current->il_prev, policy->nodes);
>  	if (nid < MAX_NUMNODES)
>  		current->il_prev = nid;
>  	return nid;
> @@ -2374,6 +2386,7 @@ static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave(gfp_t gfp,
>  		struct page **page_array)
>  {
>  	struct task_struct *me = current;
> +	unsigned int cpuset_mems_cookie;
>  	unsigned long total_allocated = 0;
>  	unsigned long nr_allocated = 0;
>  	unsigned long rounds;
> @@ -2391,7 +2404,13 @@ static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave(gfp_t gfp,
>  	if (!nr_pages)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodes);
> +	/* read the nodes onto the stack, retry if done during rebind */
> +	do {
> +		cpuset_mems_cookie = read_mems_allowed_begin();
> +		nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodes);
> +	} while (read_mems_allowed_retry(cpuset_mems_cookie));
> +
> +	/* if the nodemask has become invalid, we cannot do anything */
>  	if (!nnodes)
>  		return 0;