From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5213AC04A68 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 06:42:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 904758E0001; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 02:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 8B4EA6B0072; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 02:42:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 77B698E0001; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 02:42:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68B2F6B0071 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 02:42:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin21.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 468AF80DED for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 06:42:50 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79735565700.21.7CADFA7 Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by imf17.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E6F940023 for ; Thu, 28 Jul 2022 06:42:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1658990569; x=1690526569; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to: message-id:mime-version; bh=oxenFSWl0b21ZqPIX8MvBCx5pTHlfIRH+XxI/P8UVmw=; b=nUgjwi878dogI/+aWW5mlh734qKew1imT29ZXd6qBivL7Qlhm0XAUJ3Y IZZ8HN7aGIDwHpYcD1jw7rZdzpDfefg0W8mMyREn33NRp6lx1F+qdrna+ wU9oPqeA4Du1+fvJqbYzmMkqbJMfqfXpStIfyfI1qngiK7IgafXpUIcCx pr2QenztsnzsQcwvhEICD5EZbvULHejJVPB+X6e+wUdhBjYzTgYSnp7fM OE8UIslA11aa0tnXeW/nPMrMdirwJnVYvJYN70MSGtQxFBzDjkT3spDk6 eSs+xXWIR75hebezBr4tloZxHKTB8Ssotpstwl7r32GPDk0vUa2IVaVNh A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10421"; a="289205658" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,196,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="289205658" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jul 2022 23:42:47 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,196,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="633534477" Received: from yhuang6-desk2.sh.intel.com (HELO yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com) ([10.239.13.94]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Jul 2022 23:42:44 -0700 From: "Huang, Ying" To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Cc: Alistair Popple , linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Wei Xu , Yang Shi , Davidlohr Bueso , Tim C Chen , Michal Hocko , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Hesham Almatary , Dave Hansen , Jonathan Cameron , Dan Williams , Johannes Weiner , jvgediya.oss@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/8] mm/demotion: Add hotplug callbacks to handle new numa node onlined References: <20220720025920.1373558-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20220720025920.1373558-4-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <87fsiowmdt.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> <28582201-b438-9ac9-ca6b-1ee6e5794dd2@linux.ibm.com> <87czdruxs0.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> <87h733rwzr.fsf@linux.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 14:42:40 +0800 In-Reply-To: <87h733rwzr.fsf@linux.ibm.com> (Aneesh Kumar K. V.'s message of "Wed, 27 Jul 2022 10:08:16 +0530") Message-ID: <8735elohzz.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1658990569; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=yms2u5ZT6Hk6vZISA/4lWCIDE+gGBBGdFu3+pODfKWrB1xCzAHj/NFIXfAKB/r5cC11S42 drgaS3DIwkSWvQ8XP7nIW8pCkcmXAVAGYxFDBlyhxbMIp4vCQ3sxfcaTi+X3osUHJW1N+B Q1HT0MWssrk0Tj2FthM0oo9Y2PrYqo0= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=nUgjwi87; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of ying.huang@intel.com designates 134.134.136.24 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ying.huang@intel.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1658990569; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=VDN3q8JXt6O9J68TdwXn86UxnQiL3QWSuo6r355jOY4=; b=YaooTL12AiXA2h+Id3PkiCQlkDRbrBH9CRT+CCiZIQPDbU7b7FHXGZFY2JU5LdrW6PR0YA KXVzIAhvXiTBCCqRDpgB27emLmrko85tNLqBDf09KhE/TInw80366DXk3ck00YpxU2kiZI xe7esExtZpKXaUN1q9LcTeZGCn5ZJhg= X-Stat-Signature: jom4hwz7shn6zk8b71y6ge9f7zfq4ffg X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4E6F940023 Authentication-Results: imf17.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=nUgjwi87; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass (imf17.hostedemail.com: domain of ying.huang@intel.com designates 134.134.136.24 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ying.huang@intel.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-HE-Tag: 1658990569-27907 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes: > "Huang, Ying" writes: > >> Aneesh Kumar K V writes: >> >>> On 7/26/22 9:33 AM, Huang, Ying wrote: >>>> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes: [snip] >>>>> >>>>> +static struct memory_tier *__node_get_memory_tier(int node) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + struct memory_tier *memtier; >>>>> + >>>>> + list_for_each_entry(memtier, &memory_tiers, list) { >>>>> + if (node_isset(node, memtier->nodelist)) >>>>> + return memtier; >>>>> + } >>>>> + return NULL; >>>>> +} >>>>> + >>>>> +static void init_node_memory_tier(int node) >>>> >>>> set_node_memory_tier()? >>> >>> That was done based on feedback from Alistair >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/87h73iapg1.fsf@nvdebian.thelocal >>> >>>> >>>>> +{ >>>>> + int perf_level; >>>>> + struct memory_tier *memtier; >>>>> + >>>>> + mutex_lock(&memory_tier_lock); >>>>> + >>>>> + memtier = __node_get_memory_tier(node); >>>>> + if (!memtier) { >>>>> + perf_level = node_devices[node]->perf_level; >>>>> + memtier = find_create_memory_tier(perf_level); >>>>> + node_set(node, memtier->nodelist); >>>>> + } >> >> It's related to Alistair's comments too. When will memtier != NULL >> here? We may need just VM_WARN_ON() here? > > When the platform driver sets memory tier directly. With the old code > it can happen when dax/kmem register a node to a memory tier. With > memory_type proposal this can happen if the node is part of memory > type that is already added to a memory tier. Let's look at what it looks like with memory_type in place. Best Regards, Huang, Ying >> >>>>> + mutex_unlock(&memory_tier_lock); >>>>> +} >>>>> + [snip]