| Message ID | 20230721012932.190742-1-ying.huang@intel.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | memory tiering: calculate abstract distance based on ACPI HMAT | expand |
Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well. Hopefully next week... Huang Ying <ying.huang@intel.com> writes: > We have the explicit memory tiers framework to manage systems with > multiple types of memory, e.g., DRAM in DIMM slots and CXL memory > devices. Where, same kind of memory devices will be grouped into > memory types, then put into memory tiers. To describe the performance > of a memory type, abstract distance is defined. Which is in direct > proportion to the memory latency and inversely proportional to the > memory bandwidth. To keep the code as simple as possible, fixed > abstract distance is used in dax/kmem to describe slow memory such as > Optane DCPMM. > > To support more memory types, in this series, we added the abstract > distance calculation algorithm management mechanism, provided a > algorithm implementation based on ACPI HMAT, and used the general > abstract distance calculation interface in dax/kmem driver. So, > dax/kmem can support HBM (high bandwidth memory) in addition to the > original Optane DCPMM. > > Changelog: > > V1 (from RFC): > > - Added some comments per Aneesh's comments, Thanks! > > Best Regards, > Huang, Ying
On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:15:31 +1000 Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: > Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week > but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well. Thanks. I'll queue this in mm-unstable for some testing. Detailed review and testing would be appreciated. I made some adjustments to handle the renaming of destroy_memory_type() to put_memory_type() (https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20230706063905.543800-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com)
On 24-Jul-23 11:28 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:15:31 +1000 Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week >> but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well. > > Thanks. I'll queue this in mm-unstable for some testing. Detailed > review and testing would be appreciated. I gave this series a try on a 2P system with 2 CXL cards. I don't trust the bandwidth and latency numbers reported by HMAT here, but FWIW, this patchset puts the CXL nodes on a lower tier than DRAM nodes. Regards, Bharata.
Hi, Rao, Bharata B Rao <bharata@amd.com> writes: > On 24-Jul-23 11:28 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:15:31 +1000 Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: >> >>> Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week >>> but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well. >> >> Thanks. I'll queue this in mm-unstable for some testing. Detailed >> review and testing would be appreciated. > > I gave this series a try on a 2P system with 2 CXL cards. I don't trust the > bandwidth and latency numbers reported by HMAT here, but FWIW, this patchset > puts the CXL nodes on a lower tier than DRAM nodes. Thank you very much! Can I add your "Tested-by" for the series? -- Best Regards, Huang, Ying
On 11-Aug-23 11:56 AM, Huang, Ying wrote: > Hi, Rao, > > Bharata B Rao <bharata@amd.com> writes: > >> On 24-Jul-23 11:28 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 14:15:31 +1000 Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for this Huang, I had been hoping to take a look at it this week >>>> but have run out of time. I'm keen to do some testing with it as well. >>> >>> Thanks. I'll queue this in mm-unstable for some testing. Detailed >>> review and testing would be appreciated. >> >> I gave this series a try on a 2P system with 2 CXL cards. I don't trust the >> bandwidth and latency numbers reported by HMAT here, but FWIW, this patchset >> puts the CXL nodes on a lower tier than DRAM nodes. > > Thank you very much! > > Can I add your "Tested-by" for the series? Yes if the above test qualifies for it, please go ahead. Regards, Bharata.