From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg1-f200.google.com (mail-pg1-f200.google.com [209.85.215.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1868E6B1B1D for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 10:49:24 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pg1-f200.google.com with SMTP id y8so20744058pgq.12 for ; Mon, 19 Nov 2018 07:49:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com. [134.134.136.31]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d9si37681148pgb.105.2018.11.19.07.49.22 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 19 Nov 2018 07:49:22 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:46:05 -0700 From: Keith Busch Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] node: Add heterogenous memory performance Message-ID: <20181119154604.GC23062@localhost.localdomain> References: <20181114224921.12123-2-keith.busch@intel.com> <20181114224921.12123-3-keith.busch@intel.com> <91369e94-d389-7cb9-6274-f46c9ec779d3@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91369e94-d389-7cb9-6274-f46c9ec779d3@arm.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rafael Wysocki , Dave Hansen , Dan Williams On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 09:05:07AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 11/15/2018 04:19 AM, Keith Busch wrote: > > Heterogeneous memory systems provide memory nodes with latency > > and bandwidth performance attributes that are different from other > > nodes. Create an interface for the kernel to register these attributes > > There are other properties like power consumption, reliability which can > be associated with a particular PA range. Also the set of properties has > to be extensible for the future. Sure, I'm just starting with the attributes available from HMAT, If there are additional possible attributes that make sense to add, I don't see why we can't continue appending them if this patch is okay. > > under the node that provides the memory. If the system provides this > > information, applications can query the node attributes when deciding > > which node to request memory. > > Right but each (memory initiator, memory target) should have these above > mentioned properties enumerated to have an 'property as seen' from kind > of semantics. > > > > > When multiple memory initiators exist, accessing the same memory target > > from each may not perform the same as the other. The highest performing > > initiator to a given target is considered to be a local initiator for > > that target. The kernel provides performance attributes only for the > > local initiators. > > As mentioned above the interface must enumerate a future extensible set > of properties for each (memory initiator, memory target) pair available > on the system. That seems less friendly to use if forces the application to figure out which CPU is the best for a given memory node rather than just provide that answer directly. > > The memory's compute node should be symlinked in sysfs as one of the > > node's initiators. > > Right. IIUC the first patch skips the linking process of for two nodes A > and B if (A == B) preventing association to local memory initiator. Right, CPUs and memory sharing a proximity domain are assumed to be local to each other, so not going to set up those links to itself.