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 8B10FC19F2D for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 8A2E78E0002; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:03:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 84FF38E0001; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:03:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 6F0068E0002; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:03:17 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F5878E0001 for ; Tue, 9 Aug 2022 21:03:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358A940586 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:03:17 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79781884434.16.7681F2B Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06b.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by imf22.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F832C0145 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 01:03:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1660093396; x=1691629396; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to: message-id:mime-version; bh=QU0QFQIlk9ihlrAWfjh63Fch4PO6/pP1o8deWPkNo3o=; b=YJdmNqE/WKTLO+OLD+cZfO+YjU57GlyG4Uicd0CRn4JBhBjEkDgF4YSi cNysgMsB+bLDRYmc1gX7WQbOVq9k3NzeK1UVZ/XnqOunmFjM1w9dFLLZt /8Qswr/YqnsnuAM9+FjYAprSV8gbcsexiYKChdThzadF5Ufz6EAjf2ZYr MUpGMLfcD2Ijz/AnCrxzazqRTIl8f3iXu+UqyYIdDtftFwqAsab5MX2Im 8qKetqmaBGr+SGVVZ0UpSGvitsHH6gYjYqOqeSbUWXOy1Ce0kdqN/IlcG qjVpsrMTMTIxKGcSsYCuajRBqa58XmsZhjUNEIr3y4WiVuUOy5FUuqbMo A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10434"; a="352700162" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,225,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="352700162" Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2022 18:03:14 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,225,1654585200"; d="scan'208";a="581026940" Received: from yhuang6-desk2.sh.intel.com (HELO yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com) ([10.238.208.55]) by orsmga006-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2022 18:03:09 -0700 From: "Huang, Ying" To: Aneesh Kumar K V Cc: 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 , Alistair Popple , Dan Williams , Johannes Weiner , jvgediya.oss@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 6/9] mm/demotion: Add pg_data_t member to track node memory tier details References: <20220808062601.836025-1-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <20220808062601.836025-7-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> <87bksugfex.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 09:03:06 +0800 In-Reply-To: (Aneesh Kumar K. V.'s message of "Tue, 9 Aug 2022 11:11:15 +0530") Message-ID: <87sfm4gbat.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=1660093396; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=KnPWtoLWf8IEW17R/PvLnEnCyeg7/gmgiuIWtkbGeTPoVNLlcRu20ZlScfo0p9NiAR0svS wOKOZSqeNaQlFmTitPAe4boYViedf7fcdXz+Y4ol6ktmUjaD7YckdrEkB5Vz5XFxXtrvSU cNhUndoYcIAl6F6F5MzPIajFIVgcMLE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b="YJdmNqE/"; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of ying.huang@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ying.huang@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1660093396; 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=05YzhEcSUISDqWuI/1T9t6xNrxsOzYLAsgrUv2jZTdU=; b=8GY2ITr5AJXmTDHXtLV02bAzdH31RlCylNM4G2kIj8dgn+EmsFynxV/afKsrjX+vv9AiOf eAbv+HDK+X5uMjcFsraYOKZ5cVhsyeraZJMjTHU1ecwqmoq1yqwkm374f75jWYj0RHTiRt VlbWXHCOXeGsyvRWbeEngQ/7orOMtWk= X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5F832C0145 Authentication-Results: imf22.hostedemail.com; dkim=none ("invalid DKIM record") header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b="YJdmNqE/"; spf=pass (imf22.hostedemail.com: domain of ying.huang@intel.com designates 134.134.136.31 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ying.huang@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com X-Rspamd-Server: rspam09 X-Rspam-User: X-Stat-Signature: j9cxybgoj434bcuyaemqweqrdhjnndj5 X-HE-Tag: 1660093396-338907 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: > On 8/9/22 10:51 AM, Huang, Ying wrote: >> "Aneesh Kumar K.V" writes: >> >>> Also update different helpes to use NODE_DATA()->memtier. Since >>> node specific memtier can change based on the reassignment of >>> NUMA node to a different memory tiers, accessing NODE_DATA()->memtier >>> needs to happen under an rcu read lock or memory_tier_lock. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V >>> --- >>> include/linux/mmzone.h | 3 +++ >>> mm/memory-tiers.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ >>> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h >>> index aab70355d64f..353812495a70 100644 >>> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h >>> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h >>> @@ -928,6 +928,9 @@ typedef struct pglist_data { >>> /* Per-node vmstats */ >>> struct per_cpu_nodestat __percpu *per_cpu_nodestats; >>> atomic_long_t vm_stat[NR_VM_NODE_STAT_ITEMS]; >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NUMA >>> + struct memory_tier __rcu *memtier; >>> +#endif >>> } pg_data_t; >>> >>> #define node_present_pages(nid) (NODE_DATA(nid)->node_present_pages) >>> diff --git a/mm/memory-tiers.c b/mm/memory-tiers.c >>> index 02e514e87d5c..3778ac6a44a1 100644 >>> --- a/mm/memory-tiers.c >>> +++ b/mm/memory-tiers.c >>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ >>> #include >>> #include >>> #include >>> +#include >>> #include >>> >>> #include "internal.h" >>> @@ -137,12 +138,18 @@ static struct memory_tier *find_create_memory_tier(struct memory_dev_type *memty >>> >>> static struct memory_tier *__node_get_memory_tier(int node) >>> { >>> - struct memory_dev_type *memtype; >>> + pg_data_t *pgdat; >>> >>> - memtype = node_memory_types[node]; >>> - if (memtype && node_isset(node, memtype->nodes)) >>> - return memtype->memtier; >>> - return NULL; >> >> After adding pgdat->memtier, it appears there's unnecessary to keep >> memtype->memtier? >> > > It do simplify find_create_memory_tier() where I use if (memtype->memtier) > to check whether the memtype is already added to a memory tier. I could switch > that to list_empty(memtype->tier_sibiling). But I felt the current one is much > cleaner I prefer "list_empty(memtype->tier_sibiling)". But I will let you to decide. Best Regards, Huang, Ying