Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 6/6/22 3:41 PM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
>> On 6/3/2022 2:34 PM, Aneesh Kumar K V wrote:
>>> On 6/2/22 12:06 PM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
>>>> On 6/1/2022 7:19 PM, Aneesh Kumar K V wrote:
>>>>> On 6/1/22 11:59 AM, Bharata B Rao wrote:
>>>>>> I was experimenting with this patchset and found this behaviour.
>>>>>> Here's what I did:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Boot a KVM guest with vNVDIMM device which ends up with device_dax
>>>>>> driver by default.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Use it as RAM by binding it to dax kmem driver. It now appears as
>>>>>> RAM with a new NUMA node that is put to memtier1 (the existing tier
>>>>>> where DRAM already exists)
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That should have placed it in memtier2.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I can move it to memtier2 (MEMORY_RANK_PMEM) manually, but isn't
>>>>>> that expected to happen automatically when a node with dax kmem
>>>>>> device comes up?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This can happen if we have added the same NUMA node to memtier1 before dax kmem driver initialized the pmem memory. Can you check before the above node_set_memory_tier_rank() whether the specific NUMA node is already part of any memory tier?
>>>>
>>>> When we reach node_set_memory_tier_rank(), node1 (that has the pmem device)
>>>> is already part of memtier1 whose nodelist shows 0-1.
>>>>
>>>
>>> can you find out which code path added node1 to memtier1?
>>
>> node_set_memory_tier_rank+0x63/0x80
>> migrate_on_reclaim_callback+0x40/0x4d
>> blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x68/0x90
>> memory_notify+0x1b/0x20
>> online_pages+0x257/0x2f0
>> memory_subsys_online+0x99/0x150
>> device_online+0x65/0x90
>> online_memory_block+0x1b/0x20
>> walk_memory_blocks+0x85/0xc0
>> ? generic_online_page+0x40/0x40
>> add_memory_resource+0x1fa/0x2d0
>> add_memory_driver_managed+0x80/0xc0
>> dev_dax_kmem_probe+0x1af/0x250
>> dax_bus_probe+0x6e/0xa0
>>
>> After this the explicit call to node_set_memory_tier_rank(numa_node, MEMORY_RANK_PMEM)
>> from dev_dax_kmem_probe() finds that the memtier is already set.
>>
>>> Do you have regular memory also appearing on node1?
>>
>> No, regular memory is on Node0.
>>
>
> Thanks for the stack trace. I was getting the kvm setup on my laptop to
> test this. We should move node_set_mem_tier() early. You had automatic
> online on memory hotplug
>
> /* online pages if requested */
> if (mhp_default_online_type != MMOP_OFFLINE)
> walk_memory_blocks(start, size, NULL, online_memory_block);
>
>
> which caused memory to be onlined before we could do node_set_mem_tier.
> That is a bug on my side. Will send you a change after testing .
>
Can you try this change?
diff --git a/drivers/dax/kmem.c b/drivers/dax/kmem.c
index 7a11c387fbbc..905609260dda 100644
--- a/drivers/dax/kmem.c
+++ b/drivers/dax/kmem.c
@@ -94,6 +94,17 @@ static int dev_dax_kmem_probe(struct dev_dax *dev_dax)
goto err_reg_mgid;
data->mgid = rc;
+ /*
+ * This get called before the node is brought online. That
+ * is because depending on the value of mhp_default_online_type
+ * the kernel will online the memory along with hotplug
+ * operation. Add the new memory tier before we try to bring
+ * memory blocks online. Otherwise new node will get added to
+ * the default memory tier via hotplug callbacks.
+ */
+#ifdef CONFIG_TIERED_MEMORY
+ node_set_memory_tier(numa_node, MEMORY_TIER_PMEM);
+#endif
for (i = 0; i < dev_dax->nr_range; i++) {
struct resource *res;
struct range range;
@@ -148,9 +159,6 @@ static int dev_dax_kmem_probe(struct dev_dax *dev_dax)
dev_set_drvdata(dev, data);
-#ifdef CONFIG_TIERED_MEMORY
- node_set_memory_tier(numa_node, MEMORY_TIER_PMEM);
-#endif
return 0;
err_request_mem:
