summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/fs
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLi Zhijian <lizhijian@fujitsu.com>2024-02-06 05:01:51 +0300
committerAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>2024-02-22 21:24:55 +0300
commit601e793a749d6798764cd2eb7f459452f971ee61 (patch)
treef57630bb2c69d1fd6078210619a23324b2b72aad /fs
parent6a080670d68834d22d47506033e8940b16da4322 (diff)
downloadlinux-601e793a749d6798764cd2eb7f459452f971ee61.tar.xz
mm/demotion: print demotion targets
Currently, when a demotion occurs, it will prioritize selecting a node from the preferred targets as the destination node for the demotion. If the preferred node does not meet the requirements, it will try from all the lower memory tier nodes until it finds a suitable demotion destination node or ultimately fails. However, the demotion target information isn't exposed to the users, especially the preferred target information, which relies on more factors. This makes it hard for users to understand the exact demotion behavior. Rather than having a new sysfs interface to expose this information, printing directly to kernel messages, just like the current page allocation fallback order does. A dmesg example with this patch is as follows: [ 0.704860] Demotion targets for Node 0: null [ 0.705456] Demotion targets for Node 1: null // node 2 is onlined [ 32.259775] Demotion targets for Node 0: perferred: 2, fallback: 2 [ 32.261290] Demotion targets for Node 1: perferred: 2, fallback: 2 [ 32.262726] Demotion targets for Node 2: null // node 3 is onlined [ 42.448809] Demotion targets for Node 0: perferred: 2, fallback: 2-3 [ 42.450704] Demotion targets for Node 1: perferred: 2, fallback: 2-3 [ 42.452556] Demotion targets for Node 2: perferred: 3, fallback: 3 [ 42.454136] Demotion targets for Node 3: null // node 4 is onlined [ 52.676833] Demotion targets for Node 0: perferred: 2, fallback: 2-4 [ 52.678735] Demotion targets for Node 1: perferred: 2, fallback: 2-4 [ 52.680493] Demotion targets for Node 2: perferred: 4, fallback: 3-4 [ 52.682154] Demotion targets for Node 3: null [ 52.683405] Demotion targets for Node 4: null // node 5 is onlined [ 62.931902] Demotion targets for Node 0: perferred: 2, fallback: 2-5 [ 62.938266] Demotion targets for Node 1: perferred: 5, fallback: 2-5 [ 62.943515] Demotion targets for Node 2: perferred: 4, fallback: 3-4 [ 62.947471] Demotion targets for Node 3: null [ 62.949908] Demotion targets for Node 4: null [ 62.952137] Demotion targets for Node 5: perferred: 3, fallback: 3-4 Regarding this requirement, we have previously discussed [1]. The initial proposal involved introducing a new sysfs interface. However, due to concerns about potential changes and compatibility issues with the interface in the future, a consensus was not reached with the community. Therefore, this time, we are directly printing out the information. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/d1d5add8-8f4a-4578-8bf0-2cbe79b09989@fujitsu.com/ Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240206020151.605516-1-lizhijian@fujitsu.com Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian <lizhijian@fujitsu.com> Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> Cc: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'fs')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions