From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
To: "Gregory Price (Meta)" <gourry@gourry.net>, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, ziy@nvidia.com,
joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com, rakie.kim@sk.com,
ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, honggyu.kim@sk.com,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mempolicy: recompute automatic interleave weights on memory hotplug
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 12:19:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e3a1ae72-9370-4c3c-8935-6a410a74377b@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261024170415.4121901-1-gourry@gourry.net>
On 10/24/26 19:04, Gregory Price (Meta) wrote:
> In auto mode, weighted interleave derives each node's weight from its
> bandwidth, reduced over the nodes in N_MEMORY. HMAT and CXL report a
> node's bandwidth once, when the node first gains memory, and nothing
> else on the hotplug path recomputes the weights.
>
> When a node loses its memory, the other nodes keep weights computed
> with its bandwidth until another node reports. If one does while the
> node is away, the reduction skips the node and resets its weight to 1,
> which it keeps once its memory returns.
>
> With HMAT bandwidths of 100G for nodes 0-3, and 50G and 25G for kmem
> nodes 4 and 5, weighted_interleave/nodeN reads:
>
> event node 0-3 node 4 node 5
> node 4 online 7 3 -
> node 4 removed 7 - -
> node 5 online 7 - 1
> node 4 back 7 1 1
>
> Toggling weighted_interleave/auto to 0 and back to 1 gives the correct
> 6, 3 and 1.
>
> Recompute the weights from the recorded bandwidth whenever a node gains
> its first memory or loses its last.
>
> mempolicy_set_node_perf() now only records the bandwidth and calls the
> same helper, so the bandwidth is kept even if allocating the new weights
> fails. wi_state_lock is dropped between the two steps, which should be
> safe because the helper reads node_bw_table and the mode under the lock,
> so a racing writer only makes it work from newer state.
>
> With this patch, weighted_interleave/nodeN reads 6, 3 and 1 as soon as
> node 4 is back.
>
> Fixes: e341f9c3c841 ("mm/mempolicy: Weighted Interleave Auto-tuning")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Price (Meta) <gourry@gourry.net>
> ---
> mm/mempolicy.c | 66 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/mempolicy.c b/mm/mempolicy.c
> index 0884c629670d..ffb293a4cc56 100644
> --- a/mm/mempolicy.c
> +++ b/mm/mempolicy.c
> @@ -238,27 +238,45 @@ static void reduce_interleave_weights(unsigned int *bw, u8 *new_iw)
> new_iw[nid] /= iw_gcd;
> }
>
> +/* Recompute the weights from node_bw_table, unless they were set manually */
> +static int wi_state_refresh(void)
> +{
> + struct weighted_interleave_state *new_wi_state, *old_wi_state;
> + int i;
> +
> + new_wi_state = kmalloc_flex(*new_wi_state, iw_table, nr_node_ids);
> + if (!new_wi_state)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + new_wi_state->mode_auto = true;
> + for (i = 0; i < nr_node_ids; i++)
> + new_wi_state->iw_table[i] = 1;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&wi_state_lock);
> + old_wi_state = rcu_dereference_protected(wi_state,
> + lockdep_is_held(&wi_state_lock));
> + /* NULL wi_state assumes auto=true */
> + if (!node_bw_table || (old_wi_state && !old_wi_state->mode_auto)) {
I was confused about the node_bw_table check at first. Maybe
/*
* We can get hotplug events before any BW data was recorded.
* ...
*/
>
> /**
> @@ -3900,8 +3903,15 @@ static int wi_node_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
> case NODE_REMOVED_LAST_MEMORY:
> sysfs_wi_node_delete(nid);
> break;
> + default:
> + return NOTIFY_OK;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * HMAT and CXL report a node's bandwidth only when it first gains
> + * memory, so recompute the weights whenever N_MEMORY changes.
> + */
> + wi_state_refresh();
If the function fails, should we at least pr_warn_once() ?
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>
--
Cheers,
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-26 12:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-24 17:04 Gregory Price (Meta)
2026-10-26 11:19 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) [this message]
2026-10-26 15:47 ` Gregory Price
2026-10-26 18:13 ` Joshua Hahn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e3a1ae72-9370-4c3c-8935-6a410a74377b@kernel.org \
--to=david@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=honggyu.kim@sk.com \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®