Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a0d1:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp131851pxa; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 03:16:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyVbYZcUPPodqxmSsG8w68mU9/GN3N48mE8ZPoyN2FhW7lCskodr3jdel/LUMpa5BJTAY9j X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1ac8:: with SMTP id ba8mr2020119edb.316.1598005000707; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 03:16:40 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1598005000; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QP+dMwdVgcedZzGYU5ZQmAe82PA2Rl/7s3Br60F67e3+eLBXtc0D8eX+6ACA+ykwsf gxdOf90Na4ekS2PSo8KFCgVQoOvZktxSwunUuiLcsuRTVmdUpnvjWFRWKDH/jP4JsTUi p+rUQmYl7H+vob+AMnbRPyuSOtcfh6pa4LmrakaQyghC4j7Efh3HJPbyspUSeVcEKZgX DBLj6rh0FmK7T5J4b+wzDxrU+optZSpUoMkso5y8B3eJ1zgoGti39x8EVOlixaw/iNyB sMv2ZY2sWV2NOBoAihC/P2dJSSz4HbQMnZO7B8nOViU6Q+nPpxhdQJ6tiEtenWwuR5qM czYg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:organization:autocrypt:from:references:cc:to:subject :dkim-signature; bh=PmsTrWC7QL0R7Dl8wMRdta4a1oPLZaekFOdsDnhXsJY=; b=GbUSEFM5lnOXjdBCnqBFfXxU6o2DIrNdqj0ou6T6b+WvNeTLNoAodwYDf6mGGjogao zDlBwsKsXHhIt27McjCHSujGEwleKzzJphytj5lw/Vt7IbsT8yl/IfaQromlZFnG4+5I W5lplbguRmzTdCfCSlwtDn/4+/38J52fzkl2nKPxiJ1gEC77wIXilp+76QTXu7RWEiUb 09w94vIqqeNsAWK3DquTyTapQI1yJZblh3k2bv2jSCyRfKqhiQ8nzWCqNUVeRXUKRj2Q sB16psa+yfru0Za9DvrYETFPkyIuZJZdVaKBfRUUvXfzAFVU7Y+9fJsGLMaAeqAg6wvA E/KQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=PZCvgQWW; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h3si1059000edn.268.2020.08.21.03.16.16; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 03:16:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=PZCvgQWW; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728479AbgHUKP2 (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:15:28 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:37119 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727791AbgHUKP1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:15:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1598004925; h=from:from: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:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=PmsTrWC7QL0R7Dl8wMRdta4a1oPLZaekFOdsDnhXsJY=; b=PZCvgQWWHNEWMwZwNdpqdF44SZotdvW7gDo1cNgjmaAsSfsAL7Q84dROxAsTG5iuu0/vGN 1Zs2qm0nmEEbUSf3+0T6vo2EoEQoY2d2/JmULxFoHvUSIQC2CeJcePaLZyzjpJy+1lwO8L C3lyuaBvYpcDj63jqStPBRg14Z0yo8c= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-85-UcZwKt8kPgaJ_9wxSbWINA-1; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 06:15:20 -0400 X-MC-Unique: UcZwKt8kPgaJ_9wxSbWINA-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8B2A80733B; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:15:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.114.87] (ovpn-114-87.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.87]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1404219C78; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 10:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/23] device-dax: Support sub-dividing soft-reserved ranges To: Dan Williams Cc: Andrew Morton , Ira Weiny , Ard Biesheuvel , Mike Rapoport , Borislav Petkov , Vishal Verma , David Airlie , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Ard Biesheuvel , Joao Martins , Tom Lendacky , Dave Jiang , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Jonathan Cameron , Wei Yang , X86 ML , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Pavel Tatashin , Peter Zijlstra , Ben Skeggs , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Jason Gunthorpe , Jia He , Ingo Molnar , Dave Hansen , Paul Mackerras , Brice Goglin , Jeff Moyer , Michael Ellerman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Daniel Vetter , Andy Lutomirski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux MM , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ACPI , Maling list - DRI developers References: <159643094279.4062302.17779410714418721328.stgit@dwillia2-desk3.amr.corp.intel.com> From: David Hildenbrand Autocrypt: addr=david@redhat.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFXLn5EBEAC+zYvAFJxCBY9Tr1xZgcESmxVNI/0ffzE/ZQOiHJl6mGkmA1R7/uUpiCjJ dBrn+lhhOYjjNefFQou6478faXE6o2AhmebqT4KiQoUQFV4R7y1KMEKoSyy8hQaK1umALTdL QZLQMzNE74ap+GDK0wnacPQFpcG1AE9RMq3aeErY5tujekBS32jfC/7AnH7I0v1v1TbbK3Gp XNeiN4QroO+5qaSr0ID2sz5jtBLRb15RMre27E1ImpaIv2Jw8NJgW0k/D1RyKCwaTsgRdwuK Kx/Y91XuSBdz0uOyU/S8kM1+ag0wvsGlpBVxRR/xw/E8M7TEwuCZQArqqTCmkG6HGcXFT0V9 PXFNNgV5jXMQRwU0O/ztJIQqsE5LsUomE//bLwzj9IVsaQpKDqW6TAPjcdBDPLHvriq7kGjt WhVhdl0qEYB8lkBEU7V2Yb+SYhmhpDrti9Fq1EsmhiHSkxJcGREoMK/63r9WLZYI3+4W2rAc UucZa4OT27U5ZISjNg3Ev0rxU5UH2/pT4wJCfxwocmqaRr6UYmrtZmND89X0KigoFD/XSeVv jwBRNjPAubK9/k5NoRrYqztM9W6sJqrH8+UWZ1Idd/DdmogJh0gNC0+N42Za9yBRURfIdKSb B3JfpUqcWwE7vUaYrHG1nw54pLUoPG6sAA7Mehl3nd4pZUALHwARAQABtCREYXZpZCBIaWxk ZW5icmFuZCA8ZGF2aWRAcmVkaGF0LmNvbT6JAlgEEwEIAEICGwMGCwkIBwMCBhUIAgkKCwQW AgMBAh4BAheAAhkBFiEEG9nKrXNcTDpGDfzKTd4Q9wD/g1oFAl8Ox4kFCRKpKXgACgkQTd4Q 9wD/g1oHcA//a6Tj7SBNjFNM1iNhWUo1lxAja0lpSodSnB2g4FCZ4R61SBR4l/psBL73xktp rDHrx4aSpwkRP6Epu6mLvhlfjmkRG4OynJ5HG1gfv7RJJfnUdUM1z5kdS8JBrOhMJS2c/gPf wv1TGRq2XdMPnfY2o0CxRqpcLkx4vBODvJGl2mQyJF/gPepdDfcT8/PY9BJ7FL6Hrq1gnAo4 3Iv9qV0JiT2wmZciNyYQhmA1V6dyTRiQ4YAc31zOo2IM+xisPzeSHgw3ONY/XhYvfZ9r7W1l pNQdc2G+o4Di9NPFHQQhDw3YTRR1opJaTlRDzxYxzU6ZnUUBghxt9cwUWTpfCktkMZiPSDGd KgQBjnweV2jw9UOTxjb4LXqDjmSNkjDdQUOU69jGMUXgihvo4zhYcMX8F5gWdRtMR7DzW/YE BgVcyxNkMIXoY1aYj6npHYiNQesQlqjU6azjbH70/SXKM5tNRplgW8TNprMDuntdvV9wNkFs 9TyM02V5aWxFfI42+aivc4KEw69SE9KXwC7FSf5wXzuTot97N9Phj/Z3+jx443jo2NR34XgF 89cct7wJMjOF7bBefo0fPPZQuIma0Zym71cP61OP/i11ahNye6HGKfxGCOcs5wW9kRQEk8P9 M/k2wt3mt/fCQnuP/mWutNPt95w9wSsUyATLmtNrwccz63W5Ag0EVcufkQEQAOfX3n0g0fZz Bgm/S2zF/kxQKCEKP8ID+Vz8sy2GpDvveBq4H2Y34XWsT1zLJdvqPI4af4ZSMxuerWjXbVWb T6d4odQIG0fKx4F8NccDqbgHeZRNajXeeJ3R7gAzvWvQNLz4piHrO/B4tf8svmRBL0ZB5P5A 2uhdwLU3NZuK22zpNn4is87BPWF8HhY0L5fafgDMOqnf4guJVJPYNPhUFzXUbPqOKOkL8ojk CXxkOFHAbjstSK5Ca3fKquY3rdX3DNo+EL7FvAiw1mUtS+5GeYE+RMnDCsVFm/C7kY8c2d0G NWkB9pJM5+mnIoFNxy7YBcldYATVeOHoY4LyaUWNnAvFYWp08dHWfZo9WCiJMuTfgtH9tc75 7QanMVdPt6fDK8UUXIBLQ2TWr/sQKE9xtFuEmoQGlE1l6bGaDnnMLcYu+Asp3kDT0w4zYGsx 5r6XQVRH4+5N6eHZiaeYtFOujp5n+pjBaQK7wUUjDilPQ5QMzIuCL4YjVoylWiBNknvQWBXS lQCWmavOT9sttGQXdPCC5ynI+1ymZC1ORZKANLnRAb0NH/UCzcsstw2TAkFnMEbo9Zu9w7Kv AxBQXWeXhJI9XQssfrf4Gusdqx8nPEpfOqCtbbwJMATbHyqLt7/oz/5deGuwxgb65pWIzufa N7eop7uh+6bezi+rugUI+w6DABEBAAGJAjwEGAEIACYCGwwWIQQb2cqtc1xMOkYN/MpN3hD3 AP+DWgUCXw7HsgUJEqkpoQAKCRBN3hD3AP+DWrrpD/4qS3dyVRxDcDHIlmguXjC1Q5tZTwNB boaBTPHSy/Nksu0eY7x6HfQJ3xajVH32Ms6t1trDQmPx2iP5+7iDsb7OKAb5eOS8h+BEBDeq 3ecsQDv0fFJOA9ag5O3LLNk+3x3q7e0uo06XMaY7UHS341ozXUUI7wC7iKfoUTv03iO9El5f XpNMx/YrIMduZ2+nd9Di7o5+KIwlb2mAB9sTNHdMrXesX8eBL6T9b+MZJk+mZuPxKNVfEQMQ a5SxUEADIPQTPNvBewdeI80yeOCrN+Zzwy/Mrx9EPeu59Y5vSJOx/z6OUImD/GhX7Xvkt3kq Er5KTrJz3++B6SH9pum9PuoE/k+nntJkNMmQpR4MCBaV/J9gIOPGodDKnjdng+mXliF3Ptu6 3oxc2RCyGzTlxyMwuc2U5Q7KtUNTdDe8T0uE+9b8BLMVQDDfJjqY0VVqSUwImzTDLX9S4g/8 kC4HRcclk8hpyhY2jKGluZO0awwTIMgVEzmTyBphDg/Gx7dZU1Xf8HFuE+UZ5UDHDTnwgv7E th6RC9+WrhDNspZ9fJjKWRbveQgUFCpe1sa77LAw+XFrKmBHXp9ZVIe90RMe2tRL06BGiRZr jPrnvUsUUsjRoRNJjKKA/REq+sAnhkNPPZ/NNMjaZ5b8Tovi8C0tmxiCHaQYqj7G2rgnT0kt WNyWQQ== Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: <6af3de0d-ffdc-8942-3922-ebaeef20dd63@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:15:03 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> >> 1. On x86-64, e820 indicates "soft-reserved" memory. This memory is not >> automatically used in the buddy during boot, but remains untouched >> (similar to pmem). But as it involves ACPI as well, it could also be >> used on arm64 (-e820), correct? > > Correct, arm64 also gets the EFI support for enumerating memory this > way. However, I would clarify that whether soft-reserved is given to > the buddy allocator by default or not is the kernel's policy choice, > "buddy-by-default" is ok and is what will happen anyways with older > kernels on platforms that enumerate a memory range this way. Is "soft-reserved" then the right terminology for that? It sounds very x86-64/e820 specific. Maybe a compressed for of "performance differentiated memory" might be a better fit to expose to user space, no? > >> 2. Soft-reserved memory is volatile RAM with differing performance >> characteristics ("performance differentiated memory"). What would be >> examples of such memory? > > Likely the most prominent one that drove the creation of the "EFI > Specific Purpose" attribute bit is high-bandwidth memory. One concrete > example of that was a platform called Knights Landing [1] that ended > up shipping firmware that lied to the OS about the latency > characteristics of the memory to try to reverse engineer OS behavior > to not allocate from that memory range by default. With the EFI > attribute firmware performance tables can tell the truth about the > performance characteristics of the memory range *and* indicate that > the OS not use it for general purpose allocations by default. Thanks for clarifying! > > [1]: https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/blogs/an-intro-to-mcdram-high-bandwidth-memory-on-knights-landing.html > >> Like, memory that is faster than RAM (scratch >> pad), or slower (pmem)? Or both? :) > > Both, but note that PMEM is already hard-reserved by default. > Soft-reserved is about a memory range that, for example, an > administrator may want to reserve 100% for a weather simulation where > if even a small amount of memory was stolen for the page cache the > application may not meet its performance targets. It could also be a > memory range that is so slow that only applications with higher > latency tolerances would be prepared to consume it. > > In other words the soft-reserved memory can be used to indicate memory > that is either too precious, or too slow for general purpose OS > allocations. Right, so actually performance-differentiated in any way :) > >> Is it a valid use case to use pmem >> in a hypervisor to back this memory? > > Depends on the pmem. That performance capability is indicated by the > ACPI HMAT, not the EFI soft-reserved designation. > >> 3. There seem to be use cases where "soft-reserved" memory is used via >> DAX. What is an example use case? I assume it's *not* to treat it like >> PMEM but instead e.g., use it as a fast buffer inside applications or >> similar. > > Right, in that weather-simulation example that application could just > mmap /dev/daxX.Y and never worry about contending for the "fast > memory" resource on the platform. Alternatively if that resource needs > to be shared and/or over-commited then kernel memory-management > services are needed and that dax-device can be assigned to kmem. > >> 4. There seem to be use cases where some part of "soft-reserved" memory >> is used via DAX, some other is given to the buddy. What is an example >> use case? Is this really necessary or only some theoretical use case? > > It's as necessary as pmem namespace partitioning, or the inclusion of > dax-kmem upstream in the first place. In that kmem case the motivation > was that some users want a portion of pmem provisioned for storage and > some for volatile usage. The motivation is similar here, platform > firmware can only identify memory attributes on coarse boundaries, > finer grained provisioning decisions are up to the administrator / > platform-owner and the kernel is a just a facilitator of that policy. > >> >> 5. The "provisioned along performance relevant address boundaries." part >> is unclear to me. Can you give an example of how this would look like >> from user space? Like, split that memory in blocks of size X with >> alignment Y and give them to separate applications? > > One example of platform address boundaries are the memory address > ranges that alias in a direct-mapped memory-side-cache. In the > direct-map-cache aliasing may repeat every N GBs where N is the ratio > of far-to-near memory. ("Near memory" == cache "Far memory" == > backing memory). Also refer back to the background in the page > allocator shuffling patches [2]. With this partitioning mechanism you > could, for one example use case, assign different VMs to exclusive > colors in the memory side cache. Interesting, thanks! > > [2]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=e900a918b098 > >> 6. If you add such memory to the buddy, is there any way the system can >> differentiate it from other memory? E.g., via fake/other NUMA nodes? > > Numa node numbers / are how performance differentiated memory ranges > are enumerated. The expectation is that all distinct performance > memory targets have unique ACPI proximity domains and Linux numa node > numbers as a result. Makes sense to me (although it's somehow weird, because memory of the same socket/node would be represented via different NUMA nodes), thanks! > >> Also, can you give examples of how kmem-added memory is represented in >> /proc/iomem for a) pmem and b) soft-resered memory after this series >> (skimming over the patches, I think there is a change for pmem, right?)? > > I don't expect a change. The only difference is the parent resource > will be marked "Soft Reserved" instead of "Persistent Memory". Right, I misread patch #11 while skimming - I thought the device resource would be dropped. > >> I am really wondering if it's the right approach to squeeze this into >> our pmem/nvdimm infrastructure just because it's easy to do. E.g., man >> "ndctl" - "ndctl - Manage "libnvdimm" subsystem devices (Non-volatile >> Memory)" speaks explicitly about non-volatile memory. > > In fact it's not squeezed into PMEM infrastructure. dax-kmem and > device-dax are independent of PMEM. PMEM is one source of potential > device-dax instances, soft-reserved memory is another orthogonal > source. This is why device-dax needs its own userspace policy directed > partitioning mechanism because there is no PMEM to store the > configuration for partitioned higph-bandwidth memory. The userspace > tooling for this mechanism is targeted for a tool called daxctl that > has no PMEM dependencies. Look to Joao's use case that is using this > infrastructure independent of PMEM with manual soft-reservations > specified on the kernel command-line. Thanks for clarifying, I was under the impression we would be reusing libnvdimm to manage that memory. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb