On 07/03/2018 12:10 AM, bing.niu wrote: > Hi John, > Thanks for reviewing! Since major questions are from this thread, so I > think we can start from this. > > On 2018年06月30日 06:47, John Ferlan wrote: >> >> >> On 06/15/2018 05:29 AM, bing....@intel.com wrote: >>> From: Bing Niu <bing....@intel.com> >>> >>> resctrl not only supports cache tuning, but also memory bandwidth >>> tuning. Rename cachetune to restune(resource tuning) to reflect >>> that. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Bing Niu <bing....@intel.com> >>> --- >>> src/conf/domain_conf.c | 44 >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- >>> src/conf/domain_conf.h | 10 +++++----- >>> src/qemu/qemu_process.c | 18 +++++++++--------- >>> 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Not so sure I'm liking [R|r]estune[s]... Still @cachetunes is an array >> of a structure that contains a vCPU bitmap and a virResctrlAllocPtr for >> the /cputune/cachetunes data. The virResctrlAllocPtr was changed to add >> a the bandwidth allocation, so does this really have to change? >> > The cachetunes from Cache Allocation Technology(CAT) and memorytunes > from Memory Bandwidth Allocation(MBA) are both features from Resource > Directory Technology. RDT is a collection of resource distribution > technology, right now it includes CAT and MBA. Details information can > be found 17.18.1 of Intel's sdm. > https://software.intel.com/sites/default/files/managed/39/c5/325462-sdm-vol-1-2abcd-3abcd.pdf >
tl;dr :-) So some day soon it'll be more complicated and have even more rules?!?! > > The RDT capability and configuration methods is exposed to user land in > form of resctrl file system by kernel. The basic programming model for > this resctrl fs interface like this: > > 1. create a folder under /sys/fs/resctrl. And this folder is called one > resctrl group. > > 2. writing user desired CAT and MBA config to the file > /sys/fs/resctrl/<YOUR_GROUP_NAME>/schemata to allocate the cache or > memory bandwidth. you can set CAT and MBA together or any of them. > > 3. moving the threads you want to that resctrl group by writing threads' > PID to /sys/fs/resctrl/<YOUR_GROUP_NAME>/task file. So that those > threads can be assign with the resource allocated in step 2. And those > resources are shared by those threads. > > *NOTE*: A thread only can be put in one resctrl group. This requirement > is from how RDT and resctrl works. IOW: A vCPU or the vCPUs being used by CAT and MBA would need to be the same because in "this world" the group *is* the single vCPU or the range of vCPU's. > Each resctrl group has a closid. The resource configuration in above > step2 is set to that closid's msr(IA32_L?_QoS) to describe the resource > allocation for this closid. > And thread use this closid to claim the allocated resource during > context switch(scheduled_in()) in kernel by writing the closid to the > msr IA32_PQR_ASSOC. > With closid wrote in IA32_PQR_ASSOC, RDT hardware knows current running > closid and allocated resource basing on this closid's IA32_L?_QoS msr. > That why a thread can be put into one restrcl group only. > > Details description of resctrl can be found: > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/v4.17/Documentation/x86/intel_rdt_ui.txt > > > :) More lengthy things that I didn't read... Thanks for the pointers. I think keeping track of all the rules and relationships is going to be a real "challenge". > > Basing on above information, my understanding is that virResctrlAllocPtr > is not only bind to cachetunes. It should be a backing object to > describe a resctrl group. Especially current virresctrl class already > works as that. > Libvirt will create one resctrl group for each virResctrlAllocPtr by > virResctrlAllocCreate() interface. > > So from components view, the big picture is something like below. Yay, pictures! Thanks for taking the time. > > > <memorytune ^cpus='0-3'> > +---------+ > | <cachetune vcpus='0-3'> > XML | + > parser +-----------+ > | > | > +------------------------------+ > | > | > internal resctrl +------v--------------+ > backing object | virResctrlAllocPtr | > +------+--------------+ > | > | > +------------------------------+ > | > +--v-------+ > | | > | schemata | > /sys/fs/resctrl | tasks | > | . | > | . | > | | > +----------+ > > Does this make sense? :) > Yes and I think further has me believe that the vCPUs in this case are the groups and perhaps becomes the internal "key" for all this. I didn't go look, but have to assume multiple cachetune entries create multiple groups into which the vCPU's for the cachetune entries are placed. So far it's been easy because there's no way to overlap cachetune vCPU values (my assumption, I didn't look at the code). Now we add memtune and dictate that if it uses a vCPU or set of vCPUs that it either matches the existing cachetune entries or is itself unique and doesn't overlap any cachetune. Assume the following: <cachetune vcpus='0-1'> <cachetune vcpus='2-4'> <cachetune vcpus='5-7'> A valid memtune must also be '0-1', '2-4', 5-7', or any new grouping from 8->maxvcpus, such as '8-11'. Conversely, if <memtune vcpus='0-4'> was used, that's invalid. Similarly <memtune vcpus='3'> would be invalid. For the former, it's crossing two boundaries and for the latter it's "part of" some other boundary. Hopefully that's right... >> I think the question is - if both cachetunes and memtunes exist in >> domain XML, then for which does the @vcpus relate to. That is, from the >> cover there's: >> >> <memorytune vcpus='0-1'> >> <node id='0' bandwidth='20'/> >> </memorytune> >> >> and then there's a >> >> <cachetune vcpus='0-3'> >> <cache id='0' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> >> <cache id='1' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> >> </cachetune> >> >> Now what? I haven't looked at patch 4 yet to even know how this "works". > > I also raised this concern in the first round review. Ideally, if we can > have a domain XML like this > > <resourcetune vcpu='0-3'> > <memorytune> > <node id='0' bandwidth='20'/> > </memorytune> > <cachetune> > <cache id='0' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> > <cache id='1' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> > </cachetune> > <resourcetune> > > That will be more clear. Above domain XML means: one resctrl group with > memory bandwidth 20 @node 0, L3 cache 3MB @ node0 and node 1. Put vcpu > '0-3' to this resctrl group. So those resources are shared among vcpus. > However, Pavel pointed out that we must keep backward compatible. And we > need keep <cachetune vcpus='0-3'>. I think I was right above based on this part... Unfortunately forward thinking about memorytune didn't happen, so what you propose above is what I think "internally" once we've read the <cachetune> and <memorytune> elements we end up with. And yes, it makes sense why you renamed things now and why the vcpus are essentially reused between the two. Not a fan of restunes, RsrcDir is closer, but not a perfect shorter name the ResourceDirectory. Also rather than essentially cut-copy-paste for the vcpus logic into memtunes from cachetunes, that should be extracted into it's own helper. > > In RFC v1, I also proposed to put memory bandwidth into cachetunes > section like: > <cachetune vcpus='0-3'> > <cache id='0' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> > <node id='0' bandwidth='20'/> > <cachetune vcpus> > > Maintainer also comments on this "it's not a clear XML definition", > describing memory bandwidth inside a cachetune section. That's why we > come with a separated memorytune section. I didn't go back to the RFC when I reviewed. I tried to have a fresh look. After scanning Pavel's comments now though, I do agree having a <node> inside a <cachetune> to go along with a <cache> element is a bit confusing. But I do now see where the "math" is for the total bandwidth that can be used - it's the per node value. Something that I didn't see during my first pass. Of course I may have realized that had the example in the commit had more than 1 vCPU and 1 node. > In your example, the current implement will stop creating resctrl group > and throw an error. vcpu list cannot overlap between memorytune and > cachetune, but they can be same. Since vcpu can be put into one resctrl > group only. > > My understanding is that we can set using <resourcetune> to describe > cachetune and memorytune together as a long term goal. Since that needs > to deprecate cachetune's vcpu list. I am not sure about procedure to > remove existing XML elements. Maybe you can point out. > For the short term goal, we can use this separated <memorytune > vcpus='0-1'> section. How do you think? :) > There is no deprecation possible. You will always have to support the cachetune as a direct child of cputune. If you "fix" things up such that you introduce some other means to have a cputune/resourcetune/cachetune working before you introduce memtune as a child of resourcetune, then that works. But you'll have to know whether you read cputune/cachetune and then format out in that manner. See how the <auth> element has been handled as a "child" of the disk element originally, but now possible as a child of the source element of the disk. It's possible, but messy. > >> I think what you want to do is create a virDomainMemtuneDef that mimics >> virDomainCachetuneDef, but I'm not 100% sure. >> >> Of course that still leaves me wondering how much of virResctrlAllocPtr >> then becomes wasted. You chose an integration point, but essentially >> have separate technologies. I'm trying to make sense of it all and am >> starting to get lost in the process of doing that. > > From resctrl group perspective, I don't think extend memory bandwidth > information in virResctrlAllocPtr is a waste. I think this is a feature > extending. :) > Now that the picture is becoming clearer, I can see your point. >> >> If @bandwidth can not be > 100... Can we duplicate the @id somehow? So > Something like > <cachetune vcpus='0-3'> > <cache id='0' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB'/> > <node id='0' bandwidth='20'/> > </cachetune> > > or > > <cachetune vcpus='0-3'> > <cache id='0' level='3' type='both' size='3' unit='MiB' > bandwidth='20'/> > </cachetune> > ??? > That also works. This is something I did in RFC v1. But there is a > comment said it's better not to mix memory bandwidth with cachetune. > That may confuse people. :( > Right - as noted. I didn't read that originally. I jumped into a review for this series mainly because no one else had started reviewing it. >> how does that free buffer that got 100% and then gets subtracted from >> really work in this model? I probably need to study the code some more, >> but it's not clear it requires using the "same" sort of logic that >> cachetune uses where there could be different types (instructs, data, or >> both) that would be drawing from the size, right? I think that's how >> that worked. So what's the corollary for memtunes? You set a range from >> 0 to 100, right and that's it. OK, too many questions and it's late so >> I'll stop here... Hopefully I didn't leave any stray thoughts in the >> review of patch 1 or 2. > > The policy we used for memory bandwidth is consistent with the existing > cachetune. Current cache allocation logic model forbids cache allocation > overlap. This is to prevent resource contention I think. Same strategy > on memory allocation part. Since total bandwidth beyond to 100 will lead > to bandwidth competition. I think I've explained what I missed above... Essentially your example had 1 vCPU and thus 1 node and so it didn't make sense about the 100%. Of course if there were 3 vCPU's and 3 nodes each having some percentage, yeah then it would have been more obvious. My suggestion, let's try to get through reworking how the cachetunes data is stored. Some sort of common API to "add" a new vCPU's value that can be used by cachetune now and eventually memtune later. The vCPUs being the obvious key rather than cachetune. Fair warning - I have some days out of the office coming up over the next week or so. John > > Existing cache allocation logic achieves this by first populating > virResctrlInfoPtr structure. Libvirt will fill the virResctrlInfoPtr > structure during traverse host's cache hierarchy. When allocating cache > by virResctrlAllocCreate, libvirt will first create a virResctrlAllocPtr > basing on information from virResctrlInfoPtr. This virResctrlAllocPtr > represents the maximum resource available(I mean no any allocation > previously). Then libvirt traverse all resctrl groups (in > /sys/fs/resctrl/)created already, subtract the resource they claimed. So > the left resource is the resource free. Libvirt compares this free > resource with resource requested in virResctrlAllocCreate. If enough > free resource available, then new resctrl group will be created. > Memory bandwidth part follows the same idea, only the difference is > memory bandwidth use percentage number and cache use bitmap. > > Bing >> >> John >> >>> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.c b/src/conf/domain_conf.c >>> index 62c412e..b3543f3 100644 >>> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.c >>> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.c >>> @@ -2950,14 +2950,14 @@ virDomainLoaderDefFree(virDomainLoaderDefPtr >>> loader) >>> static void >>> -virDomainCachetuneDefFree(virDomainCachetuneDefPtr cachetune) >>> +virDomainRestuneDefFree(virDomainRestuneDefPtr restune) >>> { >>> - if (!cachetune) >>> + if (!restune) >>> return; >>> - virObjectUnref(cachetune->alloc); >>> - virBitmapFree(cachetune->vcpus); >>> - VIR_FREE(cachetune); >>> + virObjectUnref(restune->alloc); >>> + virBitmapFree(restune->vcpus); >>> + VIR_FREE(restune); >>> } >>> @@ -3147,9 +3147,9 @@ void virDomainDefFree(virDomainDefPtr def) >>> virDomainShmemDefFree(def->shmems[i]); >>> VIR_FREE(def->shmems); >>> - for (i = 0; i < def->ncachetunes; i++) >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefFree(def->cachetunes[i]); >>> - VIR_FREE(def->cachetunes); >>> + for (i = 0; i < def->nrestunes; i++) >>> + virDomainRestuneDefFree(def->restunes[i]); >>> + VIR_FREE(def->restunes); >>> VIR_FREE(def->keywrap); >>> @@ -18971,7 +18971,7 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefParse(virDomainDefPtr >>> def, >>> xmlNodePtr *nodes = NULL; >>> virBitmapPtr vcpus = NULL; >>> virResctrlAllocPtr alloc = virResctrlAllocNew(); >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefPtr tmp_cachetune = NULL; >>> + virDomainRestuneDefPtr tmp_restune = NULL; >>> char *tmp = NULL; >>> char *vcpus_str = NULL; >>> char *alloc_id = NULL; >>> @@ -18984,7 +18984,7 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefParse(virDomainDefPtr def, >>> if (!alloc) >>> goto cleanup; >>> - if (VIR_ALLOC(tmp_cachetune) < 0) >>> + if (VIR_ALLOC(tmp_restune) < 0) >>> goto cleanup; >>> vcpus_str = virXMLPropString(node, "vcpus"); >>> @@ -19025,8 +19025,8 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefParse(virDomainDefPtr def, >>> goto cleanup; >>> } >>> - for (i = 0; i < def->ncachetunes; i++) { >>> - if (virBitmapOverlaps(def->cachetunes[i]->vcpus, vcpus)) { >>> + for (i = 0; i < def->nrestunes; i++) { >>> + if (virBitmapOverlaps(def->restunes[i]->vcpus, vcpus)) { >>> virReportError(VIR_ERR_XML_ERROR, "%s", >>> _("Overlapping vcpus in cachetunes")); >>> goto cleanup; >>> @@ -19056,16 +19056,16 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefParse(virDomainDefPtr >>> def, >>> if (virResctrlAllocSetID(alloc, alloc_id) < 0) >>> goto cleanup; >>> - VIR_STEAL_PTR(tmp_cachetune->vcpus, vcpus); >>> - VIR_STEAL_PTR(tmp_cachetune->alloc, alloc); >>> + VIR_STEAL_PTR(tmp_restune->vcpus, vcpus); >>> + VIR_STEAL_PTR(tmp_restune->alloc, alloc); >>> - if (VIR_APPEND_ELEMENT(def->cachetunes, def->ncachetunes, >>> tmp_cachetune) < 0) >>> + if (VIR_APPEND_ELEMENT(def->restunes, def->nrestunes, >>> tmp_restune) < 0) >>> goto cleanup; >>> ret = 0; >>> cleanup: >>> ctxt->node = oldnode; >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefFree(tmp_cachetune); >>> + virDomainRestuneDefFree(tmp_restune); >>> virObjectUnref(alloc); >>> virBitmapFree(vcpus); >>> VIR_FREE(alloc_id); >>> @@ -26874,7 +26874,7 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefFormatHelper(unsigned >>> int level, >>> static int >>> virDomainCachetuneDefFormat(virBufferPtr buf, >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefPtr cachetune, >>> + virDomainRestuneDefPtr restune, >>> unsigned int flags) >>> { >>> virBuffer childrenBuf = VIR_BUFFER_INITIALIZER; >>> @@ -26882,7 +26882,7 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefFormat(virBufferPtr buf, >>> int ret = -1; >>> virBufferSetChildIndent(&childrenBuf, buf); >>> - virResctrlAllocForeachCache(cachetune->alloc, >>> + virResctrlAllocForeachCache(restune->alloc, >>> virDomainCachetuneDefFormatHelper, >>> &childrenBuf); >>> @@ -26895,14 +26895,14 @@ virDomainCachetuneDefFormat(virBufferPtr >>> buf, >>> goto cleanup; >>> } >>> - vcpus = virBitmapFormat(cachetune->vcpus); >>> + vcpus = virBitmapFormat(restune->vcpus); >>> if (!vcpus) >>> goto cleanup; >>> virBufferAsprintf(buf, "<cachetune vcpus='%s'", vcpus); >>> if (!(flags & VIR_DOMAIN_DEF_FORMAT_INACTIVE)) { >>> - const char *alloc_id = virResctrlAllocGetID(cachetune->alloc); >>> + const char *alloc_id = virResctrlAllocGetID(restune->alloc); >>> if (!alloc_id) >>> goto cleanup; >>> @@ -27023,8 +27023,8 @@ virDomainCputuneDefFormat(virBufferPtr buf, >>> def->iothreadids[i]->iothread_id); >>> } >>> - for (i = 0; i < def->ncachetunes; i++) >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefFormat(&childrenBuf, >>> def->cachetunes[i], flags); >>> + for (i = 0; i < def->nrestunes; i++) >>> + virDomainCachetuneDefFormat(&childrenBuf, def->restunes[i], >>> flags); >>> if (virBufferCheckError(&childrenBuf) < 0) >>> return -1; >>> diff --git a/src/conf/domain_conf.h b/src/conf/domain_conf.h >>> index 6344c02..9e71a0b 100644 >>> --- a/src/conf/domain_conf.h >>> +++ b/src/conf/domain_conf.h >>> @@ -2228,10 +2228,10 @@ struct _virDomainCputune { >>> }; >>> -typedef struct _virDomainCachetuneDef virDomainCachetuneDef; >>> -typedef virDomainCachetuneDef *virDomainCachetuneDefPtr; >>> +typedef struct _virDomainRestuneDef virDomainRestuneDef; >>> +typedef virDomainRestuneDef *virDomainRestuneDefPtr; >>> -struct _virDomainCachetuneDef { >>> +struct _virDomainRestuneDef { >>> virBitmapPtr vcpus; >>> virResctrlAllocPtr alloc; >>> }; >>> @@ -2409,8 +2409,8 @@ struct _virDomainDef { >>> virDomainCputune cputune; >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefPtr *cachetunes; >>> - size_t ncachetunes; >>> + virDomainRestuneDefPtr *restunes; >>> + size_t nrestunes; >>> virDomainNumaPtr numa; >>> virDomainResourceDefPtr resource; >>> diff --git a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> index 93fd6ba..0659c06 100644 >>> --- a/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> +++ b/src/qemu/qemu_process.c >>> @@ -2447,7 +2447,7 @@ qemuProcessResctrlCreate(virQEMUDriverPtr driver, >>> virCapsPtr caps = NULL; >>> qemuDomainObjPrivatePtr priv = vm->privateData; >>> - if (!vm->def->ncachetunes) >>> + if (!vm->def->nrestunes) >>> return 0; >>> /* Force capability refresh since resctrl info can change >>> @@ -2456,9 +2456,9 @@ qemuProcessResctrlCreate(virQEMUDriverPtr driver, >>> if (!caps) >>> return -1; >>> - for (i = 0; i < vm->def->ncachetunes; i++) { >>> + for (i = 0; i < vm->def->nrestunes; i++) { >>> if (virResctrlAllocCreate(caps->host.resctrl, >>> - vm->def->cachetunes[i]->alloc, >>> + vm->def->restunes[i]->alloc, >>> priv->machineName) < 0) >>> goto cleanup; >>> } >>> @@ -5259,8 +5259,8 @@ qemuProcessSetupVcpu(virDomainObjPtr vm, >>> &vcpu->sched) < 0) >>> return -1; >>> - for (i = 0; i < vm->def->ncachetunes; i++) { >>> - virDomainCachetuneDefPtr ct = vm->def->cachetunes[i]; >>> + for (i = 0; i < vm->def->nrestunes; i++) { >>> + virDomainRestuneDefPtr ct = vm->def->restunes[i]; >>> if (virBitmapIsBitSet(ct->vcpus, vcpuid)) { >>> if (virResctrlAllocAddPID(ct->alloc, vcpupid) < 0) >>> @@ -6955,8 +6955,8 @@ void qemuProcessStop(virQEMUDriverPtr driver, >>> /* Remove resctrl allocation after cgroups are cleaned up which >>> makes it >>> * kind of safer (although removing the allocation should work >>> even with >>> * pids in tasks file */ >>> - for (i = 0; i < vm->def->ncachetunes; i++) >>> - virResctrlAllocRemove(vm->def->cachetunes[i]->alloc); >>> + for (i = 0; i < vm->def->nrestunes; i++) >>> + virResctrlAllocRemove(vm->def->restunes[i]->alloc); >>> qemuProcessRemoveDomainStatus(driver, vm); >>> @@ -7676,8 +7676,8 @@ qemuProcessReconnect(void *opaque) >>> if (qemuConnectAgent(driver, obj) < 0) >>> goto error; >>> - for (i = 0; i < obj->def->ncachetunes; i++) { >>> - if >>> (virResctrlAllocDeterminePath(obj->def->cachetunes[i]->alloc, >>> + for (i = 0; i < obj->def->nrestunes; i++) { >>> + if (virResctrlAllocDeterminePath(obj->def->restunes[i]->alloc, >>> priv->machineName) < 0) >>> goto error; >>> } >>> >> >> -- >> libvir-list mailing list >> libvir-list@redhat.com >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list >> -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
