lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] Migrate Pages in lieu of discard
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 11:51 AM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/30/20 11:36 AM, Shakeel Butt wrote:
> >> This is part of a larger patch set. If you want to apply these or
> >> play with them, I'd suggest using the tree from here. It includes
> >> autonuma-based hot page promotion back to DRAM:
> >>
> >> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/c3d6de4d-f7c3-b505-2e64-8ee5f70b2118@intel.com
> >>
> >> This is also all based on an upstream mechanism that allows
> >> persistent memory to be onlined and used as if it were volatile:
> >>
> >> http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20190124231441.37A4A305@viggo.jf.intel.com
> >>
> > I have a high level question. Given a reclaim request for a set of
> > nodes, if there is no demotion path out of that set, should the kernel
> > still consider the migrations within the set of nodes?
>
> OK, to be specific, we're talking about a case where we've arrived at
> try_to_free_pages()

Yes.

> and, say, all of the nodes on the system are set in
> sc->nodemask? Isn't the common case that all nodes are set in
> sc->nodemask?

Depends on the workload but for normal users, yes.

> Since there is never a demotion path out of the set of
> all nodes, the common case would be that there is no demotion path out
> of a reclaim node set.
>
> If that's true, I'd say that the kernel still needs to consider
> migrations even within the set.

In my opinion it should be a user defined policy but I think that
discussion is orthogonal to this patch series. As I understand, this
patch series aims to add the migration-within-reclaim infrastructure,
IMO the policies, optimizations, heuristics can come later.

BTW is this proposal only for systems having multi-tiers of memory?
Can a multi-node DRAM-only system take advantage of this proposal? For
example I have a system with two DRAM nodes running two jobs
hardwalled to each node. For each job the other node is kind of
low-tier memory. If I can describe the per-job demotion paths then
these jobs can take advantage of this proposal during occasional
peaks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-06-30 21:27    [W:0.115 / U:5.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site