Received: by 2002:a05:7412:5112:b0:fa:6e18:a558 with SMTP id fm18csp240479rdb; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:37:05 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IE7G+N+m7Wo699hv0cQM+s6Q0fisdBafFr4PS3I2oF8CfcX3tOza+Qm4Vwg+2GKl4OmEx23 X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:bd4:b0:3bd:b578:680e with SMTP id o20-20020a0568080bd400b003bdb578680emr4321757oik.6.1705981024862; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:37:04 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1705981024; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=uJq+rZvXIguNZaCj4zKdegCI885dkDSp6KTL6RhnC6QEwvdXLwMEptwcwoQ/fUYUXK 1+UZWey+fQkXzqWRnErx9uDscAFm9tIUF6BYg7t07G1Kf0vRtx+BtG/E5icMC8NgkT/z d1Rrr7VbmxGarjGC9AItsG+1WMsED5XXZC9MLdC+kz8QkH6S+A60L/5m18a1PXPsc4yG fe8S3Z0p9cWmMjClNYR3SomXYoev6IUYIWS8Iy14XZIeGNbiZG98jqTSqZ43LTN/GKw8 vkU0acq4JLeDjXstqwBqy5sG3xz1cDOWUBqN6IoHGfGifOuLlbyk0Ap6bU6zQQ7aaIJY ncDA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=mime-version:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-id:precedence :user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to :from:dkim-signature; bh=bK4x9cqG6bAix6Yxhy8HDlyGkeIHhwHcoKwvQBwudBs=; fh=gR9ICeinQ8QHMwAWTAd1ewUU6bWfG3TEZ3Ouo5NI/Ao=; b=niPnslBVWCobE8SrssUUYnGELeh8vCYD+cIi02uWO9xlK+dezVm1PEDqk/ehF8Kxw/ KOl3vKQh5KSJzDuZHghm9wi74adR315XmoLPJWlsKqWHhfH7W92f4cT7pT2NVkxqi+bO kUD8pPv+KUJOcfDe0kD4dvli2vBUfVJ8JpZSJrvluBHCosrCfnEmCFC5gnbSpJZqSGrb qQ3/BC9OgQL8bW6VnTHU9ZsS67qgRjJ8Y0OKl8+83lP2gub0XY7GPfj5vde4hbwFbahb R1u4X3cSUfgvIO3RX5JAKJ+cQ7MrPhrB3aivoE8PqFf66WmTcYh92IKuoxXAVUqAAg0Y x6Gg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=jQwgY6v8; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=intel.com dkim=pass dkdomain=intel.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=intel.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34666-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-34666-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from sy.mirrors.kernel.org (sy.mirrors.kernel.org. [2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n16-20020a17090ac69000b0028d90fb49eesi9132970pjt.30.2024.01.22.19.37.04 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:37:04 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34666-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=jQwgY6v8; arc=pass (i=1 spf=pass spfdomain=intel.com dkim=pass dkdomain=intel.com dmarc=pass fromdomain=intel.com); spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-34666-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-34666-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sy.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 101FAB2329E for ; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 03:04:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E119D185B; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 03:04:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="jQwgY6v8" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFB28139F; Tue, 23 Jan 2024 03:04:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705979050; cv=none; b=NH7ouT2eHMGWFr8oTvMnZHyK9jnvIeNtXqKw/K1SlFWdKz3pVmRyxTBv/zD0yFUbmX9LH1V/5H2US/z9YQhR740m6JxOBsXlXeJTNBi+nd3H4AoNOidMf24J74LxiS3xuLCRrL/sObjU0n3tL5mRh2GMgR0LGAiCTSrWCgh3neg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705979050; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KaU0ncLojMCVg+X0LQluaYE+wFoPnBxUF3NBNYOSwrE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kiOyeeWhl/+V92w/xSTSbk0jIc22dGQXuYnXpULTPM31ItYxLpWNrsCRqr8AGt902t/YXsI4xWrbCMHENxMccTVUwD7mYHCiw/KAETGsTMgFVlSWYv5ljAuem0A0T0tNR+DYTyTLKBJ4zJ5DDC5o6ze+ZNR+r6W2IEmJhkxYVzY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=jQwgY6v8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.13 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1705979048; x=1737515048; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=KaU0ncLojMCVg+X0LQluaYE+wFoPnBxUF3NBNYOSwrE=; b=jQwgY6v8brqlGoYN8p4OsDPSiozxTWgMLS7tklKvBdhjtj4cSUnWNvDS r5SyOA4CATUGi3Lpy48NSW78Fi2skl7DT4pD89GkZ6yQ3QM/ZU2b/0i8w bfikTiBW1e/Ocn2idUOyXaecGYjZ9qRmNXlgkY4/7QUa/hUKAzcll0miq SQNq9LhNktpAF/BqM7+w/mLxGjEv9y7Ekb7LDTjKxTVSXD3R8Q6B9OnV7 F/bFzECjKMIjidgSbUBUAOQ6q/mR6C7+bffzAyiQL+OGJbzh/XKf1gP7u o0d3L1CW2xfjhTIWBznp8DW1FLZnH4+Asy09qPMpAw5mS0a69MPvTW1T4 w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10961"; a="295079" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,213,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="295079" Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by fmvoesa107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2024 19:04:07 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10961"; a="785892216" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,213,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="785892216" Received: from yhuang6-desk2.sh.intel.com (HELO yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com) ([10.238.208.55]) by orsmga002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jan 2024 19:04:00 -0800 From: "Huang, Ying" To: Gregory Price Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, gregory.price@memverge.com, honggyu.kim@sk.com, rakie.kim@sk.com, hyeongtak.ji@sk.com, mhocko@kernel.org, vtavarespetr@micron.com, jgroves@micron.com, ravis.opensrc@micron.com, sthanneeru@micron.com, emirakhur@micron.com, Hasan.Maruf@amd.com, seungjun.ha@samsung.com, hannes@cmpxchg.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, Srinivasulu Thanneeru Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] mm/mempolicy: introduce MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE for weighted interleaving In-Reply-To: <20240119175730.15484-4-gregory.price@memverge.com> (Gregory Price's message of "Fri, 19 Jan 2024 12:57:30 -0500") References: <20240119175730.15484-1-gregory.price@memverge.com> <20240119175730.15484-4-gregory.price@memverge.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2024 11:02:03 +0800 Message-ID: <87jzo0vjkk.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Gregory Price writes: > When a system has multiple NUMA nodes and it becomes bandwidth hungry, > using the current MPOL_INTERLEAVE could be an wise option. > > However, if those NUMA nodes consist of different types of memory such > as socket-attached DRAM and CXL/PCIe attached DRAM, the round-robin > based interleave policy does not optimally distribute data to make use > of their different bandwidth characteristics. > > Instead, interleave is more effective when the allocation policy follows > each NUMA nodes' bandwidth weight rather than a simple 1:1 distribution. > > This patch introduces a new memory policy, MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE, > enabling weighted interleave between NUMA nodes. Weighted interleave > allows for proportional distribution of memory across multiple numa > nodes, preferably apportioned to match the bandwidth of each node. > > For example, if a system has 1 CPU node (0), and 2 memory nodes (0,1), > with bandwidth of (100GB/s, 50GB/s) respectively, the appropriate > weight distribution is (2:1). > > Weights for each node can be assigned via the new sysfs extension: > /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/ > > For now, the default value of all nodes will be `1`, which matches > the behavior of standard 1:1 round-robin interleave. An extension > will be added in the future to allow default values to be registered > at kernel and device bringup time. > > The policy allocates a number of pages equal to the set weights. For > example, if the weights are (2,1), then 2 pages will be allocated on > node0 for every 1 page allocated on node1. > > The new flag MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE can be used in set_mempolicy(2) > and mbind(2). > > There are 3 integration points: > > weighted_interleave_nodes: > Counts the number of allocations as they occur, and applies the > weight for the current node. When the weight reaches 0, switch > to the next node. > > weighted_interleave_nid: > Gets the total weight of the nodemask as well as each individual > node weight, then calculates the node based on the given index. > > bulk_array_weighted_interleave: > Gets the total weight of the nodemask as well as each individual > node weight, then calculates the number of "interleave rounds" as > well as any delta ("partial round"). Calculates the number of > pages for each node and allocates them. > > If a node was scheduled for interleave via interleave_nodes, the > current weight (pol->cur_weight) will be allocated first, before > the remaining bulk calculation is done. > > One piece of complexity is the interaction between a recent refactor > which split the logic to acquire the "ilx" (interleave index) of an > allocation and the actually application of the interleave. The > calculation of the `interleave index` is done by `get_vma_policy()`, > while the actual selection of the node will be later appliex by the > relevant weighted_interleave function. > > Suggested-by: Hasan Al Maruf > Signed-off-by: Gregory Price > Co-developed-by: Rakie Kim > Signed-off-by: Rakie Kim > Co-developed-by: Honggyu Kim > Signed-off-by: Honggyu Kim > Co-developed-by: Hyeongtak Ji > Signed-off-by: Hyeongtak Ji > Co-developed-by: Srinivasulu Thanneeru > Signed-off-by: Srinivasulu Thanneeru > Co-developed-by: Ravi Jonnalagadda > Signed-off-by: Ravi Jonnalagadda > --- > .../admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst | 9 + > include/linux/mempolicy.h | 5 + > include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h | 1 + > mm/mempolicy.c | 234 +++++++++++++++++- > 4 files changed, 246 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst > index eca38fa81e0f..a70f20ce1ffb 100644 > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst > @@ -250,6 +250,15 @@ MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY > can fall back to all existing numa nodes. This is effectively > MPOL_PREFERRED allowed for a mask rather than a single node. > > +MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE > + This mode operates the same as MPOL_INTERLEAVE, except that > + interleaving behavior is executed based on weights set in > + /sys/kernel/mm/mempolicy/weighted_interleave/ > + > + Weighted interleave allocates pages on nodes according to a > + weight. For example if nodes [0,1] are weighted [5,2], 5 pages > + will be allocated on node0 for every 2 pages allocated on node1. > + > NUMA memory policy supports the following optional mode flags: > > MPOL_F_STATIC_NODES > diff --git a/include/linux/mempolicy.h b/include/linux/mempolicy.h > index 931b118336f4..c1a083eb0dd5 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mempolicy.h > +++ b/include/linux/mempolicy.h > @@ -54,6 +54,11 @@ struct mempolicy { > nodemask_t cpuset_mems_allowed; /* relative to these nodes */ > nodemask_t user_nodemask; /* nodemask passed by user */ > } w; > + > + /* Weighted interleave settings */ > + struct { > + u8 cur_weight; > + } wil; > }; > > /* > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h b/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h > index a8963f7ef4c2..1f9bb10d1a47 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ enum { > MPOL_INTERLEAVE, > MPOL_LOCAL, > MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY, > + MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE, > MPOL_MAX, /* always last member of enum */ > }; > > diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c > index 427bddf115df..aa3b2389d3e0 100644 > --- a/mm/mempolicy.c > +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c > @@ -19,6 +19,13 @@ > * for anonymous memory. For process policy an process counter > * is used. > * > + * weighted interleave > + * Allocate memory interleaved over a set of nodes based on > + * a set of weights (per-node), with normal fallback if it > + * fails. Otherwise operates the same as interleave. > + * Example: nodeset(0,1) & weights (2,1) - 2 pages allocated > + * on node 0 for every 1 page allocated on node 1. > + * > * bind Only allocate memory on a specific set of nodes, > * no fallback. > * FIXME: memory is allocated starting with the first node > @@ -313,6 +320,7 @@ static struct mempolicy *mpol_new(unsigned short mode, unsigned short flags, > policy->mode = mode; > policy->flags = flags; > policy->home_node = NUMA_NO_NODE; > + policy->wil.cur_weight = 0; > > return policy; > } > @@ -425,6 +433,10 @@ static const struct mempolicy_operations mpol_ops[MPOL_MAX] = { > .create = mpol_new_nodemask, > .rebind = mpol_rebind_preferred, > }, > + [MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE] = { > + .create = mpol_new_nodemask, > + .rebind = mpol_rebind_nodemask, > + }, > }; > > static bool migrate_folio_add(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *foliolist, > @@ -846,7 +858,8 @@ static long do_set_mempolicy(unsigned short mode, unsigned short flags, > > old = current->mempolicy; > current->mempolicy = new; > - if (new && new->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE) > + if (new && (new->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE || > + new->mode == MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE)) > current->il_prev = MAX_NUMNODES-1; > task_unlock(current); > mpol_put(old); > @@ -872,6 +885,7 @@ static void get_policy_nodemask(struct mempolicy *pol, nodemask_t *nodes) > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > case MPOL_PREFERRED: > case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > *nodes = pol->nodes; > break; > case MPOL_LOCAL: > @@ -956,6 +970,13 @@ static long do_get_mempolicy(int *policy, nodemask_t *nmask, > } else if (pol == current->mempolicy && > pol->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE) { > *policy = next_node_in(current->il_prev, pol->nodes); > + } else if (pol == current->mempolicy && > + (pol->mode == MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE)) { > + if (pol->wil.cur_weight) > + *policy = current->il_prev; > + else > + *policy = next_node_in(current->il_prev, > + pol->nodes); > } else { > err = -EINVAL; > goto out; > @@ -1785,7 +1806,8 @@ struct mempolicy *get_vma_policy(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > pol = __get_vma_policy(vma, addr, ilx); > if (!pol) > pol = get_task_policy(current); > - if (pol->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE) { > + if (pol->mode == MPOL_INTERLEAVE || > + pol->mode == MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE) { Should change the comments above get_vma_policy() definition too. > *ilx += vma->vm_pgoff >> order; > *ilx += (addr - vma->vm_start) >> (PAGE_SHIFT + order); > } > @@ -1835,6 +1857,28 @@ bool apply_policy_zone(struct mempolicy *policy, enum zone_type zone) > return zone >= dynamic_policy_zone; > } > > +static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy) > +{ > + unsigned int next; > + struct task_struct *me = current; > + u8 __rcu *table; > + > + next = next_node_in(me->il_prev, policy->nodes); > + if (next == MAX_NUMNODES) > + return next; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + if (!policy->wil.cur_weight) > + policy->wil.cur_weight = table ? table[next] : 1; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + policy->wil.cur_weight--; > + if (!policy->wil.cur_weight) > + me->il_prev = next; > + return next; > +} > + > /* Do dynamic interleaving for a process */ > static unsigned int interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy) > { > @@ -1869,6 +1913,9 @@ unsigned int mempolicy_slab_node(void) > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > return interleave_nodes(policy); > > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > + return weighted_interleave_nodes(policy); > + > case MPOL_BIND: > case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: > { > @@ -1907,6 +1954,39 @@ static unsigned int read_once_policy_nodemask(struct mempolicy *pol, > return nodes_weight(*mask); > } > > +static unsigned int weighted_interleave_nid(struct mempolicy *pol, pgoff_t ilx) > +{ > + nodemask_t nodemask; > + unsigned int target, nr_nodes; > + u8 __rcu *table; > + unsigned int weight_total = 0; > + u8 weight; > + int nid; > + > + nr_nodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodemask); > + if (!nr_nodes) > + return numa_node_id(); > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + /* calculate the total weight */ > + for_each_node_mask(nid, nodemask) > + weight_total += table ? table[nid] : 1; > + > + /* Calculate the node offset based on totals */ > + target = ilx % weight_total; > + nid = first_node(nodemask); > + while (target) { > + weight = table ? table[nid] : 1; > + if (target < weight) > + break; > + target -= weight; > + nid = next_node_in(nid, nodemask); > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + return nid; > +} > + > /* > * Do static interleaving for interleave index @ilx. Returns the ilx'th > * node in pol->nodes (starting from ilx=0), wrapping around if ilx > @@ -1967,6 +2047,11 @@ static nodemask_t *policy_nodemask(gfp_t gfp, struct mempolicy *pol, > *nid = (ilx == NO_INTERLEAVE_INDEX) ? > interleave_nodes(pol) : interleave_nid(pol, ilx); > break; > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > + *nid = (ilx == NO_INTERLEAVE_INDEX) ? > + weighted_interleave_nodes(pol) : > + weighted_interleave_nid(pol, ilx); > + break; > } > > return nodemask; > @@ -2028,6 +2113,7 @@ bool init_nodemask_of_mempolicy(nodemask_t *mask) > case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: > case MPOL_BIND: > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > *mask = mempolicy->nodes; > break; > > @@ -2127,7 +2213,8 @@ struct page *alloc_pages_mpol(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order, > * If the policy is interleave or does not allow the current > * node in its nodemask, we allocate the standard way. > */ > - if (pol->mode != MPOL_INTERLEAVE && > + if ((pol->mode != MPOL_INTERLEAVE && > + pol->mode != MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE) && > (!nodemask || node_isset(nid, *nodemask))) { > /* > * First, try to allocate THP only on local node, but > @@ -2263,6 +2350,135 @@ static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_interleave(gfp_t gfp, > return total_allocated; > } > > +static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave(gfp_t gfp, > + struct mempolicy *pol, unsigned long nr_pages, > + struct page **page_array) > +{ > + struct task_struct *me = current; > + unsigned long total_allocated = 0; > + unsigned long nr_allocated; > + unsigned long rounds; > + unsigned long node_pages, delta; > + u8 weight, resume_weight; > + u8 __rcu *table; > + u8 *weights; > + unsigned int weight_total = 0; > + unsigned long rem_pages = nr_pages; > + nodemask_t nodes; > + int nnodes, node, weight_nodes, resume_node; > + int prev_node = NUMA_NO_NODE; It appears that we should initialize prev_node with me->il_prev? Details are as below. > + bool delta_depleted = false; > + int i; > + > + if (!nr_pages) > + return 0; > + > + nnodes = read_once_policy_nodemask(pol, &nodes); > + if (!nnodes) > + return 0; > + > + /* Continue allocating from most recent node and adjust the nr_pages */ > + if (pol->wil.cur_weight) { > + node = next_node_in(me->il_prev, nodes); > + node_pages = pol->wil.cur_weight; > + if (node_pages > rem_pages) > + node_pages = rem_pages; > + nr_allocated = __alloc_pages_bulk(gfp, node, NULL, node_pages, > + NULL, page_array); > + page_array += nr_allocated; > + total_allocated += nr_allocated; > + /* if that's all the pages, no need to interleave */ > + if (rem_pages <= pol->wil.cur_weight) { > + pol->wil.cur_weight -= rem_pages; If "pol->wil.cur_weight == 0" here, we need to change me->il_prev? > + return total_allocated; > + } > + /* Otherwise we adjust nr_pages down, and continue from there */ > + rem_pages -= pol->wil.cur_weight; > + pol->wil.cur_weight = 0; > + prev_node = node; > + } else { prev_node = me->il_prev; } > + > + /* fetch the weights for this operation and calculate total weight */ > + weights = kmalloc(nnodes, GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!weights) > + return total_allocated; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + weight_nodes = 0; We can replace "weight_nodes" with "i" and use a "for" loop? > + while (weight_nodes < nnodes) { > + node = next_node_in(prev_node, nodes); IIUC, "node" will not change in the loop, so all "weight" below will be the same value. To keep it simple, I think we can just copy weights from the global iw_table and consider the default value? > + weight = table ? table[node] : 1; > + weights[weight_nodes++] = weight; > + weight_total += weight; > + } > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + /* > + * Now we can continue allocating from 0 instead of an offset > + * We calculate the number of rounds and any partial rounds so > + * that we minimize the number of calls to __alloc_pages_bulk > + * This requires us to track which node we should resume from. > + * > + * if (rounds > 0) and (delta == 0), resume_node will always be > + * the current me->il_prev > + * > + * if (delta > 0) and delta is depleted exactly on a node-weight > + * boundary, resume node will be the node last allocated from when > + * delta reached 0. > + * > + * if (delta > 0) and delta is not depleted on a node-weight boundary, > + * resume node will be the node prior to the node last allocated from. > + * > + * (rounds == 0) and (delta == 0) is not possible (earlier exit) > + */ > + rounds = rem_pages / weight_total; > + delta = rem_pages % weight_total; > + /* If no delta, we'll resume from current prev_node and first weight */ > + for (i = 0; i < nnodes; i++) { > + node = next_node_in(prev_node, nodes); > + weight = weights[i]; > + node_pages = weight * rounds; > + /* If a delta exists, add this node's portion of the delta */ > + if (delta >= weight) { > + node_pages += weight; > + delta -= weight; > + resume_node = node; > + resume_weight = i < (nnodes - 1) ? weights[i+1] : > + weights[0]; > + /* stop tracking iff (delta == weight) */ > + delta_depleted = !delta; > + } else if (delta) { /* <= weight */ The comment is unnecessary and wrong. > + /* if delta depleted, resume from this node */ > + node_pages += delta; > + delta = 0; > + resume_node = prev_node; > + resume_weight = weight - (node_pages % weight); > + delta_depleted = true; /* stop tracking */ > + } else if (!delta_depleted) { > + /* if there was no delta, track last allocated node */ > + resume_node = node; > + resume_weight = i < (nnodes - 1) ? weights[i+1] : > + weights[0]; > + } Can the above code be simplified as something like below? resume_node = prev_node; resume_weight = 0; for (...) { ... if (delta > weight) { node_pages += weight; delta -= weight; } else if (delta) { node_pages += delta; /* if delta depleted, resume from this node */ if (delta < weight) { resume_node = prev_node; resume_weight = weight - delta; } else { resume_node = node; } delta = 0; } ... } -- Best Regards, Huang, Ying > + /* node_pages can be 0 if an allocation fails and rounds == 0 */ > + if (!node_pages) > + break; > + nr_allocated = __alloc_pages_bulk(gfp, node, NULL, node_pages, > + NULL, page_array); > + page_array += nr_allocated; > + total_allocated += nr_allocated; > + if (total_allocated == nr_pages) > + break; > + prev_node = node; > + } > + /* resume allocating from the calculated node and weight */ > + me->il_prev = resume_node; > + pol->wil.cur_weight = resume_weight; > + kfree(weights); > + return total_allocated; > +} > + > static unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_preferred_many(gfp_t gfp, int nid, > struct mempolicy *pol, unsigned long nr_pages, > struct page **page_array) > @@ -2303,6 +2519,10 @@ unsigned long alloc_pages_bulk_array_mempolicy(gfp_t gfp, > return alloc_pages_bulk_array_interleave(gfp, pol, > nr_pages, page_array); > > + if (pol->mode == MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE) > + return alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave( > + gfp, pol, nr_pages, page_array); > + > if (pol->mode == MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY) > return alloc_pages_bulk_array_preferred_many(gfp, > numa_node_id(), pol, nr_pages, page_array); > @@ -2378,6 +2598,7 @@ bool __mpol_equal(struct mempolicy *a, struct mempolicy *b) > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > case MPOL_PREFERRED: > case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > return !!nodes_equal(a->nodes, b->nodes); > case MPOL_LOCAL: > return true; > @@ -2514,6 +2735,10 @@ int mpol_misplaced(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma, > polnid = interleave_nid(pol, ilx); > break; > > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > + polnid = weighted_interleave_nid(pol, ilx); > + break; > + > case MPOL_PREFERRED: > if (node_isset(curnid, pol->nodes)) > goto out; > @@ -2888,6 +3113,7 @@ static const char * const policy_modes[] = > [MPOL_PREFERRED] = "prefer", > [MPOL_BIND] = "bind", > [MPOL_INTERLEAVE] = "interleave", > + [MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE] = "weighted interleave", > [MPOL_LOCAL] = "local", > [MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY] = "prefer (many)", > }; > @@ -2947,6 +3173,7 @@ int mpol_parse_str(char *str, struct mempolicy **mpol) > } > break; > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > /* > * Default to online nodes with memory if no nodelist > */ > @@ -3057,6 +3284,7 @@ void mpol_to_str(char *buffer, int maxlen, struct mempolicy *pol) > case MPOL_PREFERRED_MANY: > case MPOL_BIND: > case MPOL_INTERLEAVE: > + case MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE: > nodes = pol->nodes; > break; > default: