Received: by 2002:a05:7412:3290:b0:fa:6e18:a558 with SMTP id ev16csp473723rdb; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 00:56:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG/yqaJJC57Cwz1rntp5OB7tsums3caYEp7x5APf560duGkGLM+mgFY6OJ3RS3L5FGMflVn X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1904:b0:42a:49eb:f9e7 with SMTP id w4-20020a05622a190400b0042a49ebf9e7mr1259668qtc.125.1706259416761; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 00:56:56 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=2; a=rsa-sha256; t=1706259416; cv=pass; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gGj6OyvFftGIV6ZnOV5X6DZXj3nIHjd/9qTjV9APXd+uL3ymz+qa00UzDZQ+gL1sDm at7pQSP+L5hdQXUDdlib7XHmtlNgRXsi2r8Y4PLjVGF7vw2QYdaoCBqCMyZ0YfZppFC7 7mmd88l2IqnA1UUNlkODebFBRwCmWueEkYt+Zr0+gEJ00Jw0oPv8WAEg32CxDW5mWZ7/ nj/svzq0IsVJx1UdKCTyDX3toA0yoGpP8SNP1ak1AuLGiNDXpYZLWGYJIWkRkhfrtNOE /g4f9nfWYRDalX86rc4xxbcaDaTrWWdvK1Euq4dZCQZX13puPABrFK1E2j9YquGgEnUv NzCg== 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=7/fXsDy+CdW2HfuXQyTCbbtep+oxgxJlw1Dq0udGIeo=; fh=gR9ICeinQ8QHMwAWTAd1ewUU6bWfG3TEZ3Ouo5NI/Ao=; b=DNcsbyBnC44EZbuRbe9BPKKi89Y0RMtoIHCR7JZSwVmGLluhvXUCxWy1UNkKE9kMzH 3pWnmUNq98lXTMjmPPCiqvavmnMKkmmfY1mPj0Hcxk9wI1vKdE388S1u6tPSe2DmFUxp 3sTdJ6Lq88Ghc0MX5Y5NEfTJK65cggChGwdFVGF2K2OQdB/rQPARRW9j/27Lr7gXTiPg NMjIHNq3gZYmPz1W40oxz9ccCz94SJSiQpLCLmZtv8BXIWYO5IoNJ94nb8G2gFOOYAOv P/Uf+gEeOC4kXKFFpx3thbzneViXsO3+Ho1L31UtK6llQdcg5TnzouGjXBcDaSzlM1tj HyYg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=2; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=WJU0Edoa; 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-39693-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-39693-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org"; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org. [147.75.199.223]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m9-20020a05622a118900b0042a5aa4f5a8si739880qtk.765.2024.01.26.00.56.56 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 26 Jan 2024 00:56:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-39693-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=WJU0Edoa; 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-39693-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="linux-kernel+bounces-39693-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 ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75CC11C232F1 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 08:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF5C5286B3; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 07:12:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="WJU0Edoa" Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.12]) (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 89DD42562B; Fri, 26 Jan 2024 07:12:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706253175; cv=none; b=Hvwf2MCVwqSyEi2KAb8JMD+qPKkuh70x1VIuSkPfIkVecOXiZsZtW7yodjghZlMhffejgNWci3tIltNen6QYet5LhvneqRblIcdjOrEDD7trzfrLtOezIfLsGb22HMSJQTTKkhTS4htwexiJR4XIGmraLF5rtj+GSPTdFk/dHuY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706253175; c=relaxed/simple; bh=am2QNUYij51eaHKGQgsNFSxQTuW4+HJP9tSiGGlgzl8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=YSQ+nv4E55NXUPZiSE1E8bjFOwM3uWxgJubfT8h4fcCcp5FHYrakdWNJU1KCyaL9VpV3Q97ckAlbLT0Rl6StxDvSsCMO34RRnGwFZ8UayjyuBWnb5DBwrM1SCpqOt9QNrm6HvhJaAUKW/hL5+jKnOMsXEEBpfh6v7MKSQvV9h3s= 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=WJU0Edoa; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.12 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=1706253173; x=1737789173; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:date: message-id:mime-version; bh=am2QNUYij51eaHKGQgsNFSxQTuW4+HJP9tSiGGlgzl8=; b=WJU0EdoaPUWufkhicCb77MbDLasX6tdTXAMitt53ZdxjHaFPJDV6oBUN zmEGlBvf1FLaXul2CvvR6bIVH3hrHJTzsTeJiP9qcNt+pjQcpl5dKFsHg KW9LV4L3E2tIoI6Y6hZjxvp3MMAH/pbGuLU5NZijEwIlCpj/Eq8o7cIem D1556Wi7grwSWyKONQAmZw0974rDL1VRSIuZCiY9QmePb65ecS4xsVYJm HOhQxzDFB5tg1i0txuUqY/gbxiwj3L+0h8FqUnktNV/TwuMe6He+27Nzo XcBNRn1vQn/xdQnW7OQJK4Zn0B+69IGOJ42aRoDfmnOcRKg7L2/IVvhog w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10964"; a="9776289" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,216,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="9776289" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by orvoesa104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jan 2024 23:12:52 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,216,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="2515984" Received: from yhuang6-desk2.sh.intel.com (HELO yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com) ([10.238.208.55]) by fmviesa005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jan 2024 23:12:46 -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 v3 3/4] mm/mempolicy: introduce MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE for weighted interleaving In-Reply-To: <20240125184345.47074-4-gregory.price@memverge.com> (Gregory Price's message of "Thu, 25 Jan 2024 13:43:44 -0500") References: <20240125184345.47074-1-gregory.price@memverge.com> <20240125184345.47074-4-gregory.price@memverge.com> Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 15:10:49 +0800 Message-ID: <87y1cclgcm.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_il_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 | 3 + > include/uapi/linux/mempolicy.h | 1 + > mm/mempolicy.c | 274 +++++++++++++++++- > 4 files changed, 283 insertions(+), 4 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..c644d7bbd396 100644 > --- a/include/linux/mempolicy.h > +++ b/include/linux/mempolicy.h > @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ struct mempolicy { > nodemask_t cpuset_mems_allowed; /* relative to these nodes */ > nodemask_t user_nodemask; /* nodemask passed by user */ > } w; > + > + /* Weighted interleave settings */ > + u8 cur_il_weight; > }; > > /* > 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 b13c45a0bfcb..5a517511658e 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 > @@ -314,6 +321,7 @@ static struct mempolicy *mpol_new(unsigned short mode, unsigned short flags, > policy->mode = mode; > policy->flags = flags; > policy->home_node = NUMA_NO_NODE; > + policy->cur_il_weight = 0; > > return policy; > } > @@ -426,6 +434,10 @@ 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, > @@ -847,7 +859,8 @@ 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); > @@ -873,6 +886,7 @@ 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: > @@ -957,6 +971,13 @@ 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->cur_il_weight) > + *policy = current->il_prev; > + else > + *policy = next_node_in(current->il_prev, > + pol->nodes); It appears that my previous comments about this is ignored. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/875xzkv3x2.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com/ Please correct me if I am wrong. > } else { > err = -EINVAL; > goto out; > @@ -1769,7 +1790,8 @@ struct mempolicy *__get_vma_policy(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > * @vma: virtual memory area whose policy is sought > * @addr: address in @vma for shared policy lookup > * @order: 0, or appropriate huge_page_order for interleaving > - * @ilx: interleave index (output), for use only when MPOL_INTERLEAVE > + * @ilx: interleave index (output), for use only when MPOL_INTERLEAVE or > + * MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE > * > * Returns effective policy for a VMA at specified address. > * Falls back to current->mempolicy or system default policy, as necessary. > @@ -1786,7 +1808,8 @@ 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) { > *ilx += vma->vm_pgoff >> order; > *ilx += (addr - vma->vm_start) >> (PAGE_SHIFT + order); > } > @@ -1836,6 +1859,44 @@ 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 node, next; > + struct task_struct *me = current; > + u8 __rcu *table; > + u8 weight; > + > + node = next_node_in(me->il_prev, policy->nodes); > + if (node == MAX_NUMNODES) > + return node; > + > + /* on first alloc after setting mempolicy, acquire first weight */ > + if (unlikely(!policy->cur_il_weight)) { > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + /* detect system-default values */ > + weight = table ? table[node] : 1; > + policy->cur_il_weight = weight ? weight : 1; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + } > + > + /* account for this allocation call */ > + policy->cur_il_weight--; > + > + /* if now at 0, move to next node and set up that node's weight */ > + if (unlikely(!policy->cur_il_weight)) { > + me->il_prev = node; > + next = next_node_in(node, policy->nodes); > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + /* detect system-default values */ > + weight = table ? table[next] : 1; > + policy->cur_il_weight = weight ? weight : 1; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + } It appears that the code could be more concise if we allow policy->cur_il_weight == 0. Duplicated code are in alloc_pages_bulk_array_weighted_interleave() too. Anyway, can we define some function to reduce duplicated code. > + return node; > +} > + > /* Do dynamic interleaving for a process */ > static unsigned int interleave_nodes(struct mempolicy *policy) > { > @@ -1870,6 +1931,9 @@ 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: > { > @@ -1908,6 +1972,39 @@ 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 > @@ -1968,6 +2065,11 @@ 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; > @@ -2029,6 +2131,7 @@ 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; > > @@ -2128,7 +2231,8 @@ 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 > @@ -2264,6 +2368,156 @@ 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, resume_node, next_node; > + int prev_node = me->il_prev; > + 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->cur_il_weight) { > + node = next_node_in(prev_node, nodes); > + node_pages = pol->cur_il_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, otherwise > + * we need to set up the next interleave node/weight correctly. > + */ > + if (rem_pages < pol->cur_il_weight) { > + /* stay on current node, adjust cur_il_weight */ > + pol->cur_il_weight -= rem_pages; > + return total_allocated; > + } else if (rem_pages == pol->cur_il_weight) { > + /* move to next node / weight */ > + me->il_prev = node; > + next_node = next_node_in(node, nodes); > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + weight = table ? table[next_node] : 1; > + /* detect system-default usage */ > + pol->cur_il_weight = weight ? weight : 1; > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + return total_allocated; > + } > + /* Otherwise we adjust nr_pages down, and continue from there */ > + rem_pages -= pol->cur_il_weight; > + pol->cur_il_weight = 0; This break the rule to keep pol->cur_il_weight != 0 except after initial setup. Is it OK? > + prev_node = node; > + } > + > + /* create a local copy of node weights to operate on outside rcu */ > + weights = kmalloc(nr_node_ids, GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!weights) > + return total_allocated; > + > + rcu_read_lock(); > + table = rcu_dereference(iw_table); > + /* If table is not registered, use system defaults */ > + if (table) > + memcpy(weights, iw_table, nr_node_ids); > + else > + memset(weights, 1, nr_node_ids); > + rcu_read_unlock(); > + > + /* calculate total, detect system default usage */ > + for_each_node_mask(node, nodes) { > + /* detect system-default usage */ > + if (!weights[node]) > + weights[node] = 1; > + weight_total += weights[node]; > + } > + > + /* > + * 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 value of prev_node, which may be NUMA_NO_NODE if > + * this is the first allocation after a policy is replaced. The > + * resume weight will be the weight of the next node. > + * > + * 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; > + resume_node = prev_node; > + resume_weight = weights[next_node_in(prev_node, nodes)]; > + /* 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[node]; > + 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; > + } else if (delta) { > + node_pages += delta; > + if (delta == weight) { > + /* resume from next node with its weight */ > + resume_node = node; > + next_node = next_node_in(node, nodes); > + resume_weight = weights[next_node]; > + } else { > + /* resume from this node w/ remaining weight */ > + resume_node = prev_node; > + resume_weight = weight - (node_pages % weight); resume_weight = weight - delta; ? > + } > + delta = 0; > + } > + /* 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->cur_il_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) > @@ -2304,6 +2558,10 @@ 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); > @@ -2379,6 +2637,7 @@ 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; > @@ -2515,6 +2774,10 @@ 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; > @@ -2889,6 +3152,7 @@ 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)", > }; > @@ -2948,6 +3212,7 @@ 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 > */ > @@ -3058,6 +3323,7 @@ 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: -- Best Regards, Huang, Ying