[v3,3/3] cxl: Add memory hotplug notifier for cxl region

Commit Message

Dave Jiang Jan. 4, 2024, 11:48 p.m. UTC

When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.

node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
for a node. The sysfs path of
/sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
to the proximity domain of the CXL region.

Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
---
v3:
- Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
- use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
- Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
---
 drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
 drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)

Comments

Dan Williams Jan. 5, 2024, 10 p.m. UTC | #1

Dave Jiang wrote:
> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> 
> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> for a node. The sysfs path of
> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
> 
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> ---
> v3:
> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> ---
>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>  		}
>  	}
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>  
>  /**
>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>  #include <linux/device.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  
> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> +{
> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> +					       memory_notifier);
> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> +	int region_nid;
> +
> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);
> +
> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
> +{
> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
> +
> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> +}
> +
>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;

Something minor for later but it is odd to have an ACPI'ism like "HMAT"
in region.c. It is even more odd to have it in include/linux/memory.h.
That really wants to be "HMEM" or "HMEM_REPORTING" since the platform or
driver code that wants to update performance details on memory-hotplug
need not be ACPI code and in fact this new CXL callback is the first
instance that proves that.

Otherwise, this patch looks good.

> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>  #include <linux/log2.h>
>  #include <linux/node.h>
> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
>   * @flags: Region state flags
>   * @params: active + config params for the region
>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
>   */
>  struct cxl_region {
>  	struct device dev;
> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
>  };
>  
>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {
> 
>

Huang, Ying Jan. 8, 2024, 6:49 a.m. UTC | #2

Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:

> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>
> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> for a node. The sysfs path of
> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> ---
> v3:
> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> ---
>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>  		}
>  	}
>  }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>  
>  /**
>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>  #include <linux/device.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>  	return 1;
>  }
>  
> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> +{
> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> +					       memory_notifier);
> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> +	int region_nid;
> +
> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> +
> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;

Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
actually didn't do that.

> +
> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);

And this.

But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

> +
> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
> +}
> +
> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
> +{
> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
> +
> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> +}
> +
>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
> +
>  	/*
>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  
>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>  #include <linux/log2.h>
>  #include <linux/node.h>
> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
>   * @flags: Region state flags
>   * @params: active + config params for the region
>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
>   */
>  struct cxl_region {
>  	struct device dev;
> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
>  };
>  
>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {

Jonathan Cameron Jan. 8, 2024, 12:15 p.m. UTC | #3

On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
"Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
> > When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> > data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> > collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> > initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> > data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> > performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> > node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> > Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> > for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> >
> > node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> > for a node. The sysfs path of
> > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> > ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> > to the proximity domain of the CXL region.

As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
(it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)

For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
about.

> >
> > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> > Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> > ---
> > v3:
> > - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> > - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> > - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> > ---
> >  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
> >  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
> >  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> > --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  }
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
> >  
> >  /**
> >   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> >  #include <linux/device.h>
> >  #include <linux/module.h>
> > +#include <linux/memory.h>
> >  #include <linux/slab.h>
> >  #include <linux/uuid.h>
> >  #include <linux/sort.h>
> > @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
> >  	return 1;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> > +{
> > +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> > +					       memory_notifier);
> > +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> > +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> > +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> > +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> > +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> > +	int region_nid;
> > +
> > +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> > +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +
> > +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> > +	if (nid != region_nid)
> > +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > +
> > +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> > +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> > +		return NOTIFY_DONE;  
> 
> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> actually didn't do that.
> 
> > +
> > +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> > +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);  
> 
> And this.
> 
> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> 
I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.

e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
are much nearer than the CPU cores.

In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).

Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
they are for any other memory.

If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.

Jonathan


> --
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying
> 
> > +
> > +	return NOTIFY_OK;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
> > +{
> > +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
> > +
> > +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
> > @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
> >  		goto out;
> >  	}
> >  
> > +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
> > +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
> > +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> > +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
> > +
> >  	/*
> >  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
> >  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
> > diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> > index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
> > --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> > +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> > @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >  
> >  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
> >  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
> > +#include <linux/notifier.h>
> >  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> >  #include <linux/log2.h>
> >  #include <linux/node.h>
> > @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
> >   * @flags: Region state flags
> >   * @params: active + config params for the region
> >   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
> > + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
> >   */
> >  struct cxl_region {
> >  	struct device dev;
> > @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  	struct cxl_region_params params;
> >  	struct access_coordinate coord;
> > +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
> >  };
> >  
> >  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {  
>

Dave Jiang Jan. 8, 2024, 4:12 p.m. UTC | #4

On 1/7/24 23:49, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>>
>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
>> for a node. The sysfs path of
>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
>>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
>> ---
>> v3:
>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
>> ---
>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  }
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>>  
>>  /**
>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>>  	return 1;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
>> +{
>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
>> +					       memory_notifier);
>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
>> +	int region_nid;
>> +
>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +
>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>> +
>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> 
> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> actually didn't do that.
> 

Thanks for the catch. Looks like somehow the change got dropped. Will get it fixed in v4. 

DJ
 
>> +
>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);
> 
> And this.
> 
> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> 
> --
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying
> 
>> +
>> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
>> +{
>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
>> +
>> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>  {
>>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
>> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>  		goto out;
>>  	}
>>  
>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
>> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
>> +
>>  	/*
>>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
>>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>  
>>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
>> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
>>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>  #include <linux/log2.h>
>>  #include <linux/node.h>
>> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
>>   * @flags: Region state flags
>>   * @params: active + config params for the region
>>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
>> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
>>   */
>>  struct cxl_region {
>>  	struct device dev;
>> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
>>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
>> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
>>  };
>>  
>>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {

Dave Jiang Jan. 8, 2024, 6:18 p.m. UTC | #5

On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
>>
>>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
>>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
>>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
>>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
>>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
>>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
>>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
>>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
>>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>>>
>>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
>>> for a node. The sysfs path of
>>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
>>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
>>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
> 
> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> 
> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> about.
> 
>>>
>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
>>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
>>> ---
>>> v3:
>>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
>>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
>>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
>>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
>>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>>>  		}
>>>  	}
>>>  }
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>>>  
>>>  /**
>>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
>>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>>>  	return 1;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
>>> +					       memory_notifier);
>>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
>>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
>>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
>>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
>>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
>>> +	int region_nid;
>>> +
>>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> +
>>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
>>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
>>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;  
>>
>> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
>> actually didn't do that.
>>
>>> +
>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);  
>>
>> And this.
>>
>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
>>
> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
> 
> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
> 
> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
> 
> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
> they are for any other memory.
> 
> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.


With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1 conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added then that is ok for what we have now?

If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as a later iteration?

DJ

> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Huang, Ying
>>
>>> +
>>> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
>>> +
>>> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>>  {
>>>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
>>> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>>  		goto out;
>>>  	}
>>>  
>>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
>>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
>>> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>>> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
>>> +
>>>  	/*
>>>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
>>>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>>  
>>>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>>>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
>>> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
>>>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>>  #include <linux/log2.h>
>>>  #include <linux/node.h>
>>> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
>>>   * @flags: Region state flags
>>>   * @params: active + config params for the region
>>>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
>>> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
>>>   */
>>>  struct cxl_region {
>>>  	struct device dev;
>>> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
>>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
>>>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
>>> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
>>>  };
>>>  
>>>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {  
>>
> 
>

Dan Williams Jan. 9, 2024, 12:26 a.m. UTC | #6

Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> > 
> > > When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> > > data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> > > collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> > > initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> > > data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> > > performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> > > node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> > > Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> > > for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> > >
> > > node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> > > for a node. The sysfs path of
> > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> > > ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> > > to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
> 
> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> 
> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> about.

Oh I had not followed any of that evolution of the original
HMEM_REPORTING code that specific indexes had different initiator
meanings vs just being a performance ordinal.

Huang, Ying Jan. 9, 2024, 2:15 a.m. UTC | #7

Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:

> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
>> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>
>>>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
>>>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
>>>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
>>>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
>>>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
>>>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
>>>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
>>>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
>>>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>>>>
>>>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
>>>> for a node. The sysfs path of
>>>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
>>>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
>>>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.
>> 
>> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
>> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
>> 
>> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
>> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
>> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
>> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
>> about.
>> 
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
>>>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
>>>> ---
>>>> v3:
>>>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
>>>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
>>>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>>>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>>>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>>>>  		}
>>>>  	}
>>>>  }
>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>>>>  
>>>>  /**
>>>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
>>>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>>>>  	return 1;
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
>>>> +					       memory_notifier);
>>>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
>>>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
>>>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
>>>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
>>>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
>>>> +	int region_nid;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>> +
>>>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
>>>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
>>>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;  
>>>
>>> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
>>> actually didn't do that.
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);  
>>>
>>> And this.
>>>
>>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
>>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
>>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
>>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
>>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
>>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
>>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
>>>
>> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
>> 
>> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
>> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
>> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
>> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
>> 
>> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
>> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
>> 
>> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
>> they are for any other memory.
>> 
>> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
>> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.
>
>
> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains a
> CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path is
> the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if the
> associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added then
> that is ok for what we have now?

We do need access1 to put NUMA nodes into appropriate memory tiers, just
like we have done in hmat.c.  Because default memory tiers are defined
with performance from CPU to the device.  Is it possible to get access1
always?

--
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

> If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
> the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how we
> calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as a
> later iteration?
>
> DJ
>
>> 
>> Jonathan
>> 
>> 
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Huang, Ying
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
>>>> +
>>>> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
>>>> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
>>>>  		goto out;
>>>>  	}
>>>>  
>>>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
>>>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
>>>> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
>>>> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
>>>> +
>>>>  	/*
>>>>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
>>>>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>>> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>>>  
>>>>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
>>>> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/log2.h>
>>>>  #include <linux/node.h>
>>>> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
>>>>   * @flags: Region state flags
>>>>   * @params: active + config params for the region
>>>>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
>>>> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
>>>>   */
>>>>  struct cxl_region {
>>>>  	struct device dev;
>>>> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
>>>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>>>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
>>>>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
>>>> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
>>>>  };
>>>>  
>>>>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {  
>>>
>> 
>>

Dave Jiang Jan. 9, 2024, 3:55 p.m. UTC | #8

On 1/8/24 19:15, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
>> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
>>> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:

<snip>

>>>>> +
>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);  
>>>>
>>>> And this.
>>>>
>>>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
>>>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
>>>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
>>>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
>>>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
>>>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
>>>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
>>>>
>>> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
>>>
>>> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
>>> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
>>> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
>>> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
>>>
>>> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
>>> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
>>>
>>> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
>>> they are for any other memory.
>>>
>>> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
>>> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.
>>
>>
>> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
>> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
>> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains a
>> CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path is
>> the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if the
>> associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
>> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added then
>> that is ok for what we have now?
> 
> We do need access1 to put NUMA nodes into appropriate memory tiers, just
> like we have done in hmat.c.  Because default memory tiers are defined
> with performance from CPU to the device.  Is it possible to get access1
> always?

Let me take a look and see how to get this done. I think we'll need to define 2 access classes for the generic target numbers (instead of currently only 1) so we can store the access0 for generic port and access1 for generic port.

Jonathan Cameron Jan. 9, 2024, 4:27 p.m. UTC | #9

On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> > "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >   
> >> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> >>  
> >>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> >>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> >>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> >>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> >>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> >>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> >>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> >>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> >>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> >>>
> >>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> >>> for a node. The sysfs path of
> >>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> >>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> >>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.  
> > 
> > As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> > (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> > 
> > For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> > review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> > so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> > Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> > about.
> >   
> >>>
> >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> >>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> >>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> >>> ---
> >>> v3:
> >>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> >>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> >>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
> >>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
> >>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> >>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> >>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
> >>>  		}
> >>>  	}
> >>>  }
> >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
> >>>  
> >>>  /**
> >>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> >>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/device.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/module.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> >>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
> >>>  	return 1;
> >>>  }
> >>>  
> >>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> >>> +					       memory_notifier);
> >>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> >>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> >>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> >>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> >>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> >>> +	int region_nid;
> >>> +
> >>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>> +
> >>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> >>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>> +
> >>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> >>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;    
> >>
> >> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> >> actually didn't do that.
> >>  
> >>> +
> >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);    
> >>
> >> And this.
> >>
> >> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> >> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> >> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> >> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> >> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> >> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> >> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> >>  
> > I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
> > 
> > e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
> > on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
> > than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
> > are much nearer than the CPU cores.
> > 
> > In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
> > cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
> > 
> > Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
> > they are for any other memory.
> > 
> > If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
> > get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.  
> 
> 
> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
> a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
> is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
> the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
> then that is ok for what we have now?

You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
course.

> 
> If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
> the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
> we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
> a later iteration?

I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.

For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/

Jonathan

> 
> DJ
> 
> > 
> > Jonathan
> > 
> >   
> >> --
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Huang, Ying
> >>  
> >>> +
> >>> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>> +static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
> >>> +{
> >>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
> >>> +
> >>> +	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>>  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
> >>>  {
> >>>  	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
> >>> @@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@ static int cxl_region_probe(struct device
> >>> *dev) goto out;
> >>>  	}
> >>>  
> >>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call =
> >>> cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
> >>> +	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
> >>> +	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
> >>> +	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev,
> >>> remove_coord_notifier, cxlr); +
> >>>  	/*
> >>>  	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's
> >>> state away from
> >>>  	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing
> >>> the driver. diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> >>> index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
> >>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> >>>  
> >>>  #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
> >>> +#include <linux/notifier.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/log2.h>
> >>>  #include <linux/node.h>
> >>> @@ -520,6 +521,7 @@ struct cxl_region_params {
> >>>   * @flags: Region state flags
> >>>   * @params: active + config params for the region
> >>>   * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
> >>> + * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates
> >>> to node */
> >>>  struct cxl_region {
> >>>  	struct device dev;
> >>> @@ -531,6 +533,7 @@ struct cxl_region {
> >>>  	unsigned long flags;
> >>>  	struct cxl_region_params params;
> >>>  	struct access_coordinate coord;
> >>> +	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
> >>>  };
> >>>  
> >>>  struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {    
> >>  
> > 
> >

Dan Williams Jan. 9, 2024, 7:28 p.m. UTC | #10

Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> > On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> > > "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > >   
> > >> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> > >>  
> > >>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> > >>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> > >>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> > >>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> > >>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> > >>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> > >>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> > >>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> > >>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> > >>>
> > >>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> > >>> for a node. The sysfs path of
> > >>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> > >>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> > >>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.  
> > > 
> > > As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> > > (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> > > 
> > > For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> > > review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> > > so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> > > Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> > > about.
> > >   
> > >>>
> > >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> > >>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> > >>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> v3:
> > >>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> > >>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> > >>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> > >>> ---
> > >>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
> > >>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
> > >>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > >>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> > >>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > >>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > >>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
> > >>>  		}
> > >>>  	}
> > >>>  }
> > >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
> > >>>  
> > >>>  /**
> > >>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > >>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> > >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > >>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> > >>>  #include <linux/device.h>
> > >>>  #include <linux/module.h>
> > >>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
> > >>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> > >>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
> > >>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> > >>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
> > >>>  	return 1;
> > >>>  }
> > >>>  
> > >>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > >>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> > >>> +{
> > >>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> > >>> +					       memory_notifier);
> > >>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> > >>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> > >>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> > >>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> > >>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> > >>> +	int region_nid;
> > >>> +
> > >>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > >>> +
> > >>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> > >>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > >>> +
> > >>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> > >>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;    
> > >>
> > >> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> > >> actually didn't do that.
> > >>  
> > >>> +
> > >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> > >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);    
> > >>
> > >> And this.
> > >>
> > >> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> > >> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> > >> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> > >> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> > >> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> > >> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> > >> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> > >>  
> > > I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
> > > 
> > > e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
> > > on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
> > > than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
> > > are much nearer than the CPU cores.
> > > 
> > > In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
> > > cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
> > > 
> > > Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
> > > they are for any other memory.
> > > 
> > > If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
> > > get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.  
> > 
> > 
> > With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
> > best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
> > code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
> > a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
> > is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
> > the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
> > conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
> > then that is ok for what we have now?
> 
> You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
> one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
> Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
> course.

Where is "access1" coming from? The generic port is the only performance
profile that is being calculated by the CDAT code and there is no other
initiator.

Now if "access1" is a convention of "that's the CPU" then we should skip
emitting access0 altogether and reserve that for some future accelerator
case that can define a better access profile talking to its own local
memory.  Otherwise having access0 and access1 when the only initiator is
the generic port (which includes all CPUs attached to that generic port)
does not resolve for me.

> > If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
> > the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
> > we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
> > a later iteration?
> 
> I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
> is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.
> 
> For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
> GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
> be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/

It seems sad that we, as an industry, went through all this trouble to
define an enumerable CXL bus only to fall back to ACPI for enumeration.

The Linux reaction to CFMWS takes a "Linux likely needs *at least* this many
memory target nodes considered at the beginning of time", with a "circle
back to the dynamic node creation problem later if it proves to be
insufficient". The NVIDIA proposal appears to be crossing that
threshold, and I will go invite them to do the work to dynamically
enumerate initiators into the Linux tracking structures.

As for where this leaves this patchset, it is clear from this
conversation that v6.9 is a better target for clarifying this NUMA
information, but I think it is ok to move ahead with the base CDAT
parsing for v6.8 (the bits that are already exposed to linux-next). Any
objections?

Jonathan Cameron Jan. 10, 2024, 10 a.m. UTC | #11

On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:28:22 -0800
Dan Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
> > Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >   
> > > On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
> > > > On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> > > > "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > >     
> > > >> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> > > >>    
> > > >>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> > > >>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> > > >>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> > > >>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> > > >>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> > > >>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> > > >>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> > > >>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> > > >>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> > > >>> for a node. The sysfs path of
> > > >>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> > > >>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> > > >>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.    
> > > > 
> > > > As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> > > > (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> > > > 
> > > > For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> > > > review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> > > > so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> > > > Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> > > > about.
> > > >     
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> > > >>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> > > >>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>> v3:
> > > >>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> > > >>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> > > >>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> > > >>> ---
> > > >>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
> > > >>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
> > > >>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> > > >>>
> > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> > > >>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> > > >>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> > > >>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> > > >>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
> > > >>>  		}
> > > >>>  	}
> > > >>>  }
> > > >>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
> > > >>>  
> > > >>>  /**
> > > >>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > > >>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> > > >>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > > >>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> > > >>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> > > >>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> > > >>>  #include <linux/device.h>
> > > >>>  #include <linux/module.h>
> > > >>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
> > > >>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> > > >>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
> > > >>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> > > >>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
> > > >>>  	return 1;
> > > >>>  }
> > > >>>  
> > > >>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> > > >>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> > > >>> +{
> > > >>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> > > >>> +					       memory_notifier);
> > > >>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> > > >>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> > > >>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> > > >>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> > > >>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> > > >>> +	int region_nid;
> > > >>> +
> > > >>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> > > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > > >>> +
> > > >>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> > > >>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> > > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> > > >>> +
> > > >>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> > > >>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> > > >>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;      
> > > >>
> > > >> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> > > >> actually didn't do that.
> > > >>    
> > > >>> +
> > > >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> > > >>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);      
> > > >>
> > > >> And this.
> > > >>
> > > >> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> > > >> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> > > >> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> > > >> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> > > >> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> > > >> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> > > >> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> > > >>    
> > > > I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
> > > > 
> > > > e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
> > > > on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
> > > > than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
> > > > are much nearer than the CPU cores.
> > > > 
> > > > In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
> > > > cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
> > > > 
> > > > Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
> > > > they are for any other memory.
> > > > 
> > > > If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
> > > > get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.    
> > > 
> > > 
> > > With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
> > > best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
> > > code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
> > > a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
> > > is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
> > > the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
> > > conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
> > > then that is ok for what we have now?  
> > 
> > You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
> > one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
> > Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
> > course.  
> 
> Where is "access1" coming from? The generic port is the only performance
> profile that is being calculated by the CDAT code and there is no other
> initiator.

This isn't about initiators on the CXL side of the port (for now anyway).
It's about intiators in the host system.

> 
> Now if "access1" is a convention of "that's the CPU" then we should skip
> emitting access0 altogether and reserve that for some future accelerator
> case that can define a better access profile talking to its own local
> memory.  Otherwise having access0 and access1 when the only initiator is
> the generic port (which includes all CPUs attached to that generic port)
> does not resolve for me.

The initiators here are:

* CPUs in the host - due to limitations of the HMAT presentation that actually
  means those CPUs in the host that are nearest to the generic port. Only
  these are considered for access1. So for simple placement decisions on
  CPU only workloads this is what matters.
* Other initiators in the host such NICs on PCI (typically ones that
  are presented at RCiEPs or behind 'fake' switches but actually in the same
  die as the root complex)  These and CPUs are included for access0
* (not supported yet). Other initiators in the CXL fabric.

My ancient white paper needs an update to include generic ports as they do
make things more complex.
https://github.com/hisilicon/acpi-numa-whitepaper/releases/download/v0.93/NUMA_Description_Under_ACPI_6.3_v0.93.pdf

Anyhow:  ASCI art time. (simplified diagram of an old production CPU with CXL added
where the PCI RC is - so no future product info but expect to see systems that
looks similar to this :))

Note the IO die might also be in the middle, or my "favorite" design - in a separate
package entirely - IO expanders on the inter socket interconnect - (UPI or similar) ;)
Note these might not be physical systems - an example is a VM workload
which occasionally needs to use an 'extra' GPU. That GPU comes from a host socket
on which the VM has no CPU resources or memory.  Anyhow given the diagrams
I've seen of production systems pretty much anything you can conceive is is being
built by someone.

        ________________      __________________
       |                |    |                  |            
       |  Host DDR(PXM0)|    |  Host DDR (PXM1) |
       |________________|    |__________________|
              |                       |
       _______|_______         _______|____        _________________
       |              |       |            |       |                | 
       |   CPU Die    |-------|  CPU Die   |-------|  IO DIE        |
       |   PXM 0      |       |  PXM 1     |       |  PXM 2         |
       |              |       |            |       |  NIC (GP + GI) |
       |______________|       |____________|       |________________|
                                                           |
                                                    _______|________
                                                   |               |
                                                   |   CXL Mem     |
                                                   |               |
                                                   |_______________|

So in this case access0 should have PXM2 as the initiator and include
the bandwidth and latency numbers from PXM2 to itself (where the GP is)
and those to the CXL memory that Dave's code adds in.

Access1 is from PXM1 to PXM2 (to get to the GP) and on to the CXL mem.

Note that one reason to do this is that the latency from the NIC in PXM2
to CXL mem might well be not much worse than from it to the memory on PXM 1
(cpu Die) so placement decisions might favor putting NIC buffers in CXL mem
particularly if the bandwidth is good.



> 
> > > If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
> > > the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
> > > we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
> > > a later iteration?  
> > 
> > I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
> > is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.
> > 
> > For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
> > GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
> > be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
> > https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/  
> 
> It seems sad that we, as an industry, went through all this trouble to
> define an enumerable CXL bus only to fall back to ACPI for enumeration.

History - a lot of this stuff was in design before CXL surfaced.
I think we are all pushing for people to reuse the CXL defined infrastructure
(or similar) in the long term to make everything enumerable.

Arguably for a host system ACPI is the enumeration method...


> 
> The Linux reaction to CFMWS takes a "Linux likely needs *at least* this many
> memory target nodes considered at the beginning of time", with a "circle
> back to the dynamic node creation problem later if it proves to be
> insufficient". The NVIDIA proposal appears to be crossing that
> threshold, and I will go invite them to do the work to dynamically
> enumerate initiators into the Linux tracking structures.

Absolutely - various replies in earlier threads made that point
(and that everyone has been kicking that tire down the road for years).

> 
> As for where this leaves this patchset, it is clear from this
> conversation that v6.9 is a better target for clarifying this NUMA
> information, but I think it is ok to move ahead with the base CDAT
> parsing for v6.8 (the bits that are already exposed to linux-next). Any
> objections?
> 
Should be fine if we keep away from the userspace exposed new bits
(though I think we can clarify them fairly fast - it's a bit late ;(

Jonathan

Dave Jiang Jan. 10, 2024, 3:27 p.m. UTC | #12

On 1/10/24 03:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:28:22 -0800
> Dan Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
>>>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
>>>>> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
>>>>>>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
>>>>>>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
>>>>>>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
>>>>>>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
>>>>>>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
>>>>>>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
>>>>>>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
>>>>>>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
>>>>>>> for a node. The sysfs path of
>>>>>>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
>>>>>>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
>>>>>>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.    
>>>>>
>>>>> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
>>>>> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
>>>>>
>>>>> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
>>>>> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
>>>>> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
>>>>> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
>>>>> about.
>>>>>     
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> v3:
>>>>>>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
>>>>>>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
>>>>>>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>>>>>>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>>>>>>>  		}
>>>>>>>  	}
>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  /**
>>>>>>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>>>>>>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
>>>>>>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>>>>>>>  	return 1;
>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
>>>>>>> +					       memory_notifier);
>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
>>>>>>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
>>>>>>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
>>>>>>> +	int region_nid;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
>>>>>>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
>>>>>>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;      
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
>>>>>> actually didn't do that.
>>>>>>    
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);      
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
>>>>>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
>>>>>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
>>>>>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
>>>>>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
>>>>>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
>>>>>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
>>>>>>    
>>>>> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
>>>>>
>>>>> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
>>>>> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
>>>>> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
>>>>> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
>>>>>
>>>>> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
>>>>> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
>>>>>
>>>>> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
>>>>> they are for any other memory.
>>>>>
>>>>> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
>>>>> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.    
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
>>>> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
>>>> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
>>>> a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
>>>> is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
>>>> the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
>>>> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
>>>> then that is ok for what we have now?  
>>>
>>> You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
>>> one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
>>> Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
>>> course.  
>>
>> Where is "access1" coming from? The generic port is the only performance
>> profile that is being calculated by the CDAT code and there is no other
>> initiator.
> 
> This isn't about initiators on the CXL side of the port (for now anyway).
> It's about intiators in the host system.
> 
>>
>> Now if "access1" is a convention of "that's the CPU" then we should skip
>> emitting access0 altogether and reserve that for some future accelerator
>> case that can define a better access profile talking to its own local
>> memory.  Otherwise having access0 and access1 when the only initiator is
>> the generic port (which includes all CPUs attached to that generic port)
>> does not resolve for me.
> 
> The initiators here are:
> 
> * CPUs in the host - due to limitations of the HMAT presentation that actually
>   means those CPUs in the host that are nearest to the generic port. Only
>   these are considered for access1. So for simple placement decisions on
>   CPU only workloads this is what matters.
> * Other initiators in the host such NICs on PCI (typically ones that
>   are presented at RCiEPs or behind 'fake' switches but actually in the same
>   die as the root complex)  These and CPUs are included for access0
> * (not supported yet). Other initiators in the CXL fabric.
> 
> My ancient white paper needs an update to include generic ports as they do
> make things more complex.
> https://github.com/hisilicon/acpi-numa-whitepaper/releases/download/v0.93/NUMA_Description_Under_ACPI_6.3_v0.93.pdf
> 
> Anyhow:  ASCI art time. (simplified diagram of an old production CPU with CXL added
> where the PCI RC is - so no future product info but expect to see systems that
> looks similar to this :))
> 
> Note the IO die might also be in the middle, or my "favorite" design - in a separate
> package entirely - IO expanders on the inter socket interconnect - (UPI or similar) ;)
> Note these might not be physical systems - an example is a VM workload
> which occasionally needs to use an 'extra' GPU. That GPU comes from a host socket
> on which the VM has no CPU resources or memory.  Anyhow given the diagrams
> I've seen of production systems pretty much anything you can conceive is is being
> built by someone.
> 
>         ________________      __________________
>        |                |    |                  |            
>        |  Host DDR(PXM0)|    |  Host DDR (PXM1) |
>        |________________|    |__________________|
>               |                       |
>        _______|_______         _______|____        _________________
>        |              |       |            |       |                | 
>        |   CPU Die    |-------|  CPU Die   |-------|  IO DIE        |
>        |   PXM 0      |       |  PXM 1     |       |  PXM 2         |
>        |              |       |            |       |  NIC (GP + GI) |
>        |______________|       |____________|       |________________|
>                                                            |
>                                                     _______|________
>                                                    |               |
>                                                    |   CXL Mem     |
>                                                    |               |
>                                                    |_______________|
> 
> So in this case access0 should have PXM2 as the initiator and include
> the bandwidth and latency numbers from PXM2 to itself (where the GP is)
> and those to the CXL memory that Dave's code adds in.
> 
> Access1 is from PXM1 to PXM2 (to get to the GP) and on to the CXL mem.
> 
> Note that one reason to do this is that the latency from the NIC in PXM2
> to CXL mem might well be not much worse than from it to the memory on PXM 1
> (cpu Die) so placement decisions might favor putting NIC buffers in CXL mem
> particularly if the bandwidth is good.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>>> If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
>>>> the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
>>>> we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
>>>> a later iteration?  
>>>
>>> I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
>>> is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.
>>>
>>> For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
>>> GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
>>> be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/  
>>
>> It seems sad that we, as an industry, went through all this trouble to
>> define an enumerable CXL bus only to fall back to ACPI for enumeration.
> 
> History - a lot of this stuff was in design before CXL surfaced.
> I think we are all pushing for people to reuse the CXL defined infrastructure
> (or similar) in the long term to make everything enumerable.
> 
> Arguably for a host system ACPI is the enumeration method...
> 
> 
>>
>> The Linux reaction to CFMWS takes a "Linux likely needs *at least* this many
>> memory target nodes considered at the beginning of time", with a "circle
>> back to the dynamic node creation problem later if it proves to be
>> insufficient". The NVIDIA proposal appears to be crossing that
>> threshold, and I will go invite them to do the work to dynamically
>> enumerate initiators into the Linux tracking structures.
> 
> Absolutely - various replies in earlier threads made that point
> (and that everyone has been kicking that tire down the road for years).
> 
>>
>> As for where this leaves this patchset, it is clear from this
>> conversation that v6.9 is a better target for clarifying this NUMA
>> information, but I think it is ok to move ahead with the base CDAT
>> parsing for v6.8 (the bits that are already exposed to linux-next). Any
>> objections?
>>
> Should be fine if we keep away from the userspace exposed new bits
> (though I think we can clarify them fairly fast - it's a bit late ;(

The only exposure to user space is the QTG ID (qos_class) based on access0 generic target numbers. 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>

Jonathan Cameron Jan. 12, 2024, 11:30 a.m. UTC | #13

On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:27:57 -0700
Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 1/10/24 03:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:28:22 -0800
> > Dan Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >   
> >> Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
> >>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
> >>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>     
> >>>> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:    
> >>>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
> >>>>> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>>>       
> >>>>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
> >>>>>>      
> >>>>>>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
> >>>>>>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
> >>>>>>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
> >>>>>>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
> >>>>>>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
> >>>>>>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
> >>>>>>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
> >>>>>>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
> >>>>>>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
> >>>>>>> for a node. The sysfs path of
> >>>>>>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
> >>>>>>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
> >>>>>>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.      
> >>>>>
> >>>>> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
> >>>>> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
> >>>>> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
> >>>>> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
> >>>>> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
> >>>>> about.
> >>>>>       
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>> v3:
> >>>>>>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
> >>>>>>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
> >>>>>>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
> >>>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
> >>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
> >>>>>>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
> >>>>>>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
> >>>>>>>  		}
> >>>>>>>  	}
> >>>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
> >>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>>  /**
> >>>>>>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>>>>>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/device.h>
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
> >>>>>>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
> >>>>>>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
> >>>>>>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
> >>>>>>>  	return 1;
> >>>>>>>  }
> >>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
> >>>>>>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
> >>>>>>> +{
> >>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
> >>>>>>> +					       memory_notifier);
> >>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
> >>>>>>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
> >>>>>>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
> >>>>>>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
> >>>>>>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
> >>>>>>> +	int region_nid;
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
> >>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
> >>>>>>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
> >>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
> >>>>>>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
> >>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;        
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
> >>>>>> actually didn't do that.
> >>>>>>      
> >>>>>>> +
> >>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
> >>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);        
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
> >>>>>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
> >>>>>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
> >>>>>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
> >>>>>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
> >>>>>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
> >>>>>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
> >>>>>>      
> >>>>> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
> >>>>> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
> >>>>> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
> >>>>> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
> >>>>> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
> >>>>> they are for any other memory.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
> >>>>> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.      
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
> >>>> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
> >>>> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
> >>>> a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
> >>>> is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
> >>>> the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
> >>>> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
> >>>> then that is ok for what we have now?    
> >>>
> >>> You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
> >>> one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
> >>> Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
> >>> course.    
> >>
> >> Where is "access1" coming from? The generic port is the only performance
> >> profile that is being calculated by the CDAT code and there is no other
> >> initiator.  
> > 
> > This isn't about initiators on the CXL side of the port (for now anyway).
> > It's about intiators in the host system.
> >   
> >>
> >> Now if "access1" is a convention of "that's the CPU" then we should skip
> >> emitting access0 altogether and reserve that for some future accelerator
> >> case that can define a better access profile talking to its own local
> >> memory.  Otherwise having access0 and access1 when the only initiator is
> >> the generic port (which includes all CPUs attached to that generic port)
> >> does not resolve for me.  
> > 
> > The initiators here are:
> > 
> > * CPUs in the host - due to limitations of the HMAT presentation that actually
> >   means those CPUs in the host that are nearest to the generic port. Only
> >   these are considered for access1. So for simple placement decisions on
> >   CPU only workloads this is what matters.
> > * Other initiators in the host such NICs on PCI (typically ones that
> >   are presented at RCiEPs or behind 'fake' switches but actually in the same
> >   die as the root complex)  These and CPUs are included for access0
> > * (not supported yet). Other initiators in the CXL fabric.
> > 
> > My ancient white paper needs an update to include generic ports as they do
> > make things more complex.
> > https://github.com/hisilicon/acpi-numa-whitepaper/releases/download/v0.93/NUMA_Description_Under_ACPI_6.3_v0.93.pdf
> > 
> > Anyhow:  ASCI art time. (simplified diagram of an old production CPU with CXL added
> > where the PCI RC is - so no future product info but expect to see systems that
> > looks similar to this :))
> > 
> > Note the IO die might also be in the middle, or my "favorite" design - in a separate
> > package entirely - IO expanders on the inter socket interconnect - (UPI or similar) ;)
> > Note these might not be physical systems - an example is a VM workload
> > which occasionally needs to use an 'extra' GPU. That GPU comes from a host socket
> > on which the VM has no CPU resources or memory.  Anyhow given the diagrams
> > I've seen of production systems pretty much anything you can conceive is is being
> > built by someone.
> > 
> >         ________________      __________________
> >        |                |    |                  |            
> >        |  Host DDR(PXM0)|    |  Host DDR (PXM1) |
> >        |________________|    |__________________|
> >               |                       |
> >        _______|_______         _______|____        _________________
> >        |              |       |            |       |                | 
> >        |   CPU Die    |-------|  CPU Die   |-------|  IO DIE        |
> >        |   PXM 0      |       |  PXM 1     |       |  PXM 2         |
> >        |              |       |            |       |  NIC (GP + GI) |
> >        |______________|       |____________|       |________________|
> >                                                            |
> >                                                     _______|________
> >                                                    |               |
> >                                                    |   CXL Mem     |
> >                                                    |               |
> >                                                    |_______________|
> > 
> > So in this case access0 should have PXM2 as the initiator and include
> > the bandwidth and latency numbers from PXM2 to itself (where the GP is)
> > and those to the CXL memory that Dave's code adds in.
> > 
> > Access1 is from PXM1 to PXM2 (to get to the GP) and on to the CXL mem.
> > 
> > Note that one reason to do this is that the latency from the NIC in PXM2
> > to CXL mem might well be not much worse than from it to the memory on PXM 1
> > (cpu Die) so placement decisions might favor putting NIC buffers in CXL mem
> > particularly if the bandwidth is good.
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >>  
> >>>> If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
> >>>> the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
> >>>> we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
> >>>> a later iteration?    
> >>>
> >>> I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
> >>> is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.
> >>>
> >>> For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
> >>> GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
> >>> be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/    
> >>
> >> It seems sad that we, as an industry, went through all this trouble to
> >> define an enumerable CXL bus only to fall back to ACPI for enumeration.  
> > 
> > History - a lot of this stuff was in design before CXL surfaced.
> > I think we are all pushing for people to reuse the CXL defined infrastructure
> > (or similar) in the long term to make everything enumerable.
> > 
> > Arguably for a host system ACPI is the enumeration method...
> > 
> >   
> >>
> >> The Linux reaction to CFMWS takes a "Linux likely needs *at least* this many
> >> memory target nodes considered at the beginning of time", with a "circle
> >> back to the dynamic node creation problem later if it proves to be
> >> insufficient". The NVIDIA proposal appears to be crossing that
> >> threshold, and I will go invite them to do the work to dynamically
> >> enumerate initiators into the Linux tracking structures.  
> > 
> > Absolutely - various replies in earlier threads made that point
> > (and that everyone has been kicking that tire down the road for years).
> >   
> >>
> >> As for where this leaves this patchset, it is clear from this
> >> conversation that v6.9 is a better target for clarifying this NUMA
> >> information, but I think it is ok to move ahead with the base CDAT
> >> parsing for v6.8 (the bits that are already exposed to linux-next). Any
> >> objections?
> >>  
> > Should be fine if we keep away from the userspace exposed new bits
> > (though I think we can clarify them fairly fast - it's a bit late ;(  
> 
> The only exposure to user space is the QTG ID (qos_class) based on access0 generic target numbers.

That's a fun corner case.   Which one is appropriate? My gut feeling is access1
but if the GI is in the host, then the QOS may want to reflect that. If the GI
is on the CXL bus then whether host QOS matters is dependent on whether P2P is
going on and where the bottleneck that is driving the QOS decisions in the host
is.

Let us cross our fingers that that this never matters in practice.  I can't
face trying to get a clarification on this in appropriate standards groups given
it's all a bit hypothetical for QOS (hence QTG selection) at least.

Jonathan

> > 
> > Jonathan
> > 
> >

Dave Jiang Jan. 12, 2024, 3:57 p.m. UTC | #14

On 1/12/24 04:30, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2024 08:27:57 -0700
> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> On 1/10/24 03:00, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>>> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:28:22 -0800
>>> Dan Williams <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>   
>>>> Jonathan Cameron wrote:  
>>>>> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 11:18:33 -0700
>>>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>     
>>>>>> On 1/8/24 05:15, Jonathan Cameron wrote:    
>>>>>>> On Mon, 08 Jan 2024 14:49:03 +0800
>>>>>>> "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>> Dave Jiang <[e-mail]> writes:
>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>> When the CXL region is formed, the driver would computed the performance
>>>>>>>>> data for the region. However this data is not available at the node data
>>>>>>>>> collection that has been populated by the HMAT during kernel
>>>>>>>>> initialization. Add a memory hotplug notifier to update the performance
>>>>>>>>> data to the node hmem_attrs to expose the newly calculated region
>>>>>>>>> performance data. The CXL region is created under specific CFMWS. The
>>>>>>>>> node for the CFMWS is created during SRAT parsing by acpi_parse_cfmws().
>>>>>>>>> Additional regions may overwrite the initial data, but since this is
>>>>>>>>> for the same proximity domain it's a don't care for now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> node_set_perf_attrs() symbol is exported to allow update of perf attribs
>>>>>>>>> for a node. The sysfs path of
>>>>>>>>> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/access0/initiators/* is created by
>>>>>>>>> ndoe_set_perf_attrs() for the various attributes where nodeX is matched
>>>>>>>>> to the proximity domain of the CXL region.      
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As per discussion below.  Why is access1 not also relevant for CXL memory?
>>>>>>> (it's probably more relevant than access0 in many cases!)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For historical references, I wanted access0 to be the CPU only one, but
>>>>>>> review feedback was that access0 was already defined as 'initiator based'
>>>>>>> so we couldn't just make the 0 indexed one the case most people care about.
>>>>>>> Hence we grew access1 to cover the CPU only case which most software cares
>>>>>>> about.
>>>>>>>       
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>> Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Dave Jiang <[e-mail]>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> v3:
>>>>>>>>> - Change EXPORT_SYMBOL_NS_GPL(,CXL) to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() (Jonathan)
>>>>>>>>> - use read_bandwidth as check for valid coords (Jonathan)
>>>>>>>>> - Remove setting of coord access level 1. (Jonathan)
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>  drivers/base/node.c       |    1 +
>>>>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/core/region.c |   42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>>>  drivers/cxl/cxl.h         |    3 +++
>>>>>>>>>  3 files changed, 46 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>>>> index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/node.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -215,6 +215,7 @@ void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
>>>>>>>>>  		}
>>>>>>>>>  	}
>>>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>  /**
>>>>>>>>>   * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>>>> index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/genalloc.h>
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/device.h>
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/module.h>
>>>>>>>>> +#include <linux/memory.h>
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/uuid.h>
>>>>>>>>>  #include <linux/sort.h>
>>>>>>>>> @@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@ static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
>>>>>>>>>  	return 1;
>>>>>>>>>  }
>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>> +static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
>>>>>>>>> +					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
>>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
>>>>>>>>> +					       memory_notifier);
>>>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
>>>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
>>>>>>>>> +	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
>>>>>>>>> +	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
>>>>>>>>> +	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
>>>>>>>>> +	int region_nid;
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> +	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
>>>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> +	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
>>>>>>>>> +	if (nid != region_nid)
>>>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> +	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
>>>>>>>>> +	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
>>>>>>>>> +		return NOTIFY_DONE;        
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although you said you will use "read_bandwidth" in changelog, you
>>>>>>>> actually didn't do that.
>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
>>>>>>>>> +	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);        
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But I don't think it's good to remove access level 1.  According to
>>>>>>>> commit b9fffe47212c ("node: Add access1 class to represent CPU to memory
>>>>>>>> characteristics").  Access level 1 is for performance from CPU to
>>>>>>>> memory.  So, we should keep access level 1.  For CXL memory device,
>>>>>>>> access level 0 and access level 1 should be equivalent.  Will the code
>>>>>>>> be used for something like GPU connected via CXL?  Where the access
>>>>>>>> level 0 may be for the performance from GPU to the memory.
>>>>>>>>      
>>>>>>> I disagree. They are no more equivalent than they are on any other complex system.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> e.g. A CXL root port being described using generic Port infrastructure may be
>>>>>>> on a different die (IO dies are a common architecture) in the package
>>>>>>> than the CPU cores and that IO die may well have generic initiators that
>>>>>>> are much nearer than the CPU cores.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In those cases access0 will cover initators on the IO die but access1 will
>>>>>>> cover the nearest CPU cores (initiators).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Both should arguably be there for CXL memory as both are as relevant as
>>>>>>> they are for any other memory.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If / when we get some GPUs etc on CXL that are initiators this will all
>>>>>>> get a lot more fun but for now we can kick that into the long grass.      
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With the current way of storing HMAT targets information, only the
>>>>>> best performance data is stored (access0). The existing HMAT handling
>>>>>> code also sets the access1 if the associated initiator node contains
>>>>>> a CPU for conventional memory. The current calculated full CXL path
>>>>>> is the access0 data. I think what's missing is the check to see if
>>>>>> the associated initiator node is also a CPU node and sets access1
>>>>>> conditionally based on that. Maybe if that conditional gets added
>>>>>> then that is ok for what we have now?    
>>>>>
>>>>> You also need the access1 initiators to be figured out (nearest
>>>>> one that has a CPU) - so two separate sets of calculations.
>>>>> Could short cut the maths if they happen to be the same node of
>>>>> course.    
>>>>
>>>> Where is "access1" coming from? The generic port is the only performance
>>>> profile that is being calculated by the CDAT code and there is no other
>>>> initiator.  
>>>
>>> This isn't about initiators on the CXL side of the port (for now anyway).
>>> It's about intiators in the host system.
>>>   
>>>>
>>>> Now if "access1" is a convention of "that's the CPU" then we should skip
>>>> emitting access0 altogether and reserve that for some future accelerator
>>>> case that can define a better access profile talking to its own local
>>>> memory.  Otherwise having access0 and access1 when the only initiator is
>>>> the generic port (which includes all CPUs attached to that generic port)
>>>> does not resolve for me.  
>>>
>>> The initiators here are:
>>>
>>> * CPUs in the host - due to limitations of the HMAT presentation that actually
>>>   means those CPUs in the host that are nearest to the generic port. Only
>>>   these are considered for access1. So for simple placement decisions on
>>>   CPU only workloads this is what matters.
>>> * Other initiators in the host such NICs on PCI (typically ones that
>>>   are presented at RCiEPs or behind 'fake' switches but actually in the same
>>>   die as the root complex)  These and CPUs are included for access0
>>> * (not supported yet). Other initiators in the CXL fabric.
>>>
>>> My ancient white paper needs an update to include generic ports as they do
>>> make things more complex.
>>> https://github.com/hisilicon/acpi-numa-whitepaper/releases/download/v0.93/NUMA_Description_Under_ACPI_6.3_v0.93.pdf
>>>
>>> Anyhow:  ASCI art time. (simplified diagram of an old production CPU with CXL added
>>> where the PCI RC is - so no future product info but expect to see systems that
>>> looks similar to this :))
>>>
>>> Note the IO die might also be in the middle, or my "favorite" design - in a separate
>>> package entirely - IO expanders on the inter socket interconnect - (UPI or similar) ;)
>>> Note these might not be physical systems - an example is a VM workload
>>> which occasionally needs to use an 'extra' GPU. That GPU comes from a host socket
>>> on which the VM has no CPU resources or memory.  Anyhow given the diagrams
>>> I've seen of production systems pretty much anything you can conceive is is being
>>> built by someone.
>>>
>>>         ________________      __________________
>>>        |                |    |                  |            
>>>        |  Host DDR(PXM0)|    |  Host DDR (PXM1) |
>>>        |________________|    |__________________|
>>>               |                       |
>>>        _______|_______         _______|____        _________________
>>>        |              |       |            |       |                | 
>>>        |   CPU Die    |-------|  CPU Die   |-------|  IO DIE        |
>>>        |   PXM 0      |       |  PXM 1     |       |  PXM 2         |
>>>        |              |       |            |       |  NIC (GP + GI) |
>>>        |______________|       |____________|       |________________|
>>>                                                            |
>>>                                                     _______|________
>>>                                                    |               |
>>>                                                    |   CXL Mem     |
>>>                                                    |               |
>>>                                                    |_______________|
>>>
>>> So in this case access0 should have PXM2 as the initiator and include
>>> the bandwidth and latency numbers from PXM2 to itself (where the GP is)
>>> and those to the CXL memory that Dave's code adds in.
>>>
>>> Access1 is from PXM1 to PXM2 (to get to the GP) and on to the CXL mem.
>>>
>>> Note that one reason to do this is that the latency from the NIC in PXM2
>>> to CXL mem might well be not much worse than from it to the memory on PXM 1
>>> (cpu Die) so placement decisions might favor putting NIC buffers in CXL mem
>>> particularly if the bandwidth is good.
>>>
>>>
>>>   
>>>>  
>>>>>> If/When the non-CPU initiators shows up for CXL, we'll need to change
>>>>>> the way to store the initiator to generic target table data and how
>>>>>> we calculate and setup access0 vs access1. Maybe that can be done as
>>>>>> a later iteration?    
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not that bothered yet about CXL initiators - the issue today
>>>>> is ones on a different node the host side of the root ports.
>>>>>
>>>>> For giggles the NVIDIA Grace proposals for how they manage their
>>>>> GPU partitioning will create a bunch of GI nodes that may well
>>>>> be nearer to the CXL ports - I've no idea!
>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/[e-mail]/    
>>>>
>>>> It seems sad that we, as an industry, went through all this trouble to
>>>> define an enumerable CXL bus only to fall back to ACPI for enumeration.  
>>>
>>> History - a lot of this stuff was in design before CXL surfaced.
>>> I think we are all pushing for people to reuse the CXL defined infrastructure
>>> (or similar) in the long term to make everything enumerable.
>>>
>>> Arguably for a host system ACPI is the enumeration method...
>>>
>>>   
>>>>
>>>> The Linux reaction to CFMWS takes a "Linux likely needs *at least* this many
>>>> memory target nodes considered at the beginning of time", with a "circle
>>>> back to the dynamic node creation problem later if it proves to be
>>>> insufficient". The NVIDIA proposal appears to be crossing that
>>>> threshold, and I will go invite them to do the work to dynamically
>>>> enumerate initiators into the Linux tracking structures.  
>>>
>>> Absolutely - various replies in earlier threads made that point
>>> (and that everyone has been kicking that tire down the road for years).
>>>   
>>>>
>>>> As for where this leaves this patchset, it is clear from this
>>>> conversation that v6.9 is a better target for clarifying this NUMA
>>>> information, but I think it is ok to move ahead with the base CDAT
>>>> parsing for v6.8 (the bits that are already exposed to linux-next). Any
>>>> objections?
>>>>  
>>> Should be fine if we keep away from the userspace exposed new bits
>>> (though I think we can clarify them fairly fast - it's a bit late ;(  
>>
>> The only exposure to user space is the QTG ID (qos_class) based on access0 generic target numbers.
> 
> That's a fun corner case.   Which one is appropriate? My gut feeling is access1

I can fix that in my next rev of the HMEM_REPORTING series if your guidance is to go with access1. It should be a 1 line change within the new changes coming that addresses access0 and access1 for CXL.

DJ

> but if the GI is in the host, then the QOS may want to reflect that. If the GI
> is on the CXL bus then whether host QOS matters is dependent on whether P2P is
> going on and where the bottleneck that is driving the QOS decisions in the host
> is.
> 
> Let us cross our fingers that that this never matters in practice.  I can't
> face trying to get a clarification on this in appropriate standards groups given
> it's all a bit hypothetical for QOS (hence QTG selection) at least.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
>>>
>>> Jonathan
>>>
>>>   
>

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/base/node.c b/drivers/base/node.c
index cb2b6cc7f6e6..48e5cb292765 100644
--- a/drivers/base/node.c
+++ b/drivers/base/node.c
@@ -215,6 +215,7 @@  void node_set_perf_attrs(unsigned int nid, struct access_coordinate *coord,
 		}
 	}
 }
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(node_set_perf_attrs);
 
 /**
  * struct node_cache_info - Internal tracking for memory node caches
diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
index d28d24524d41..bee65f535d6c 100644
--- a/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
+++ b/drivers/cxl/core/region.c
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/genalloc.h>
 #include <linux/device.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/memory.h>
 #include <linux/slab.h>
 #include <linux/uuid.h>
 #include <linux/sort.h>
@@ -2972,6 +2973,42 @@  static int is_system_ram(struct resource *res, void *arg)
 	return 1;
 }
 
+static int cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback(struct notifier_block *nb,
+					  unsigned long action, void *arg)
+{
+	struct cxl_region *cxlr = container_of(nb, struct cxl_region,
+					       memory_notifier);
+	struct cxl_region_params *p = &cxlr->params;
+	struct cxl_endpoint_decoder *cxled = p->targets[0];
+	struct cxl_decoder *cxld = &cxled->cxld;
+	struct memory_notify *mnb = arg;
+	int nid = mnb->status_change_nid;
+	int region_nid;
+
+	if (nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || action != MEM_ONLINE)
+		return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+	region_nid = phys_to_target_node(cxld->hpa_range.start);
+	if (nid != region_nid)
+		return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+	/* Don't set if there's no coordinate information */
+	if (!cxlr->coord.write_bandwidth)
+		return NOTIFY_DONE;
+
+	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 0);
+	node_set_perf_attrs(nid, &cxlr->coord, 1);
+
+	return NOTIFY_OK;
+}
+
+static void remove_coord_notifier(void *data)
+{
+	struct cxl_region *cxlr = data;
+
+	unregister_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
+}
+
 static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
 {
 	struct cxl_region *cxlr = to_cxl_region(dev);
@@ -2997,6 +3034,11 @@  static int cxl_region_probe(struct device *dev)
 		goto out;
 	}
 
+	cxlr->memory_notifier.notifier_call = cxl_region_perf_attrs_callback;
+	cxlr->memory_notifier.priority = HMAT_CALLBACK_PRI;
+	register_memory_notifier(&cxlr->memory_notifier);
+	rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(&cxlr->dev, remove_coord_notifier, cxlr);
+
 	/*
 	 * From this point on any path that changes the region's state away from
 	 * CXL_CONFIG_COMMIT is also responsible for releasing the driver.
diff --git a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
index 4639d0d6ef54..2498086c8edc 100644
--- a/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
+++ b/drivers/cxl/cxl.h
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ 
 
 #include <linux/libnvdimm.h>
 #include <linux/bitfield.h>
+#include <linux/notifier.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
 #include <linux/log2.h>
 #include <linux/node.h>
@@ -520,6 +521,7 @@  struct cxl_region_params {
  * @flags: Region state flags
  * @params: active + config params for the region
  * @coord: QoS access coordinates for the region
+ * @memory_notifier: notifier for setting the access coordinates to node
  */
 struct cxl_region {
 	struct device dev;
@@ -531,6 +533,7 @@  struct cxl_region {
 	unsigned long flags;
 	struct cxl_region_params params;
 	struct access_coordinate coord;
+	struct notifier_block memory_notifier;
 };
 
 struct cxl_nvdimm_bridge {