[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] memory tiering: use small chunk size and more tiers
On 10/28/2022 11:16 AM, Huang, Ying wrote:
> If my understanding were correct, you think the latency / bandwidth of
> these NUMA nodes will near each other, but may be different.
> Even if the latency / bandwidth of these NUMA nodes isn't exactly same,
> we should deal with that in memory types instead of memory tiers.
> There's only one abstract distance for each memory type.
> So, I still believe we will not have many memory tiers with my proposal.
> I don't care too much about the exact number, but want to discuss some
> general design choice,
> a) Avoid to group multiple memory types into one memory tier by default
> at most times.

Do you expect the abstract distances of two different types to be
close enough in real life (like you showed in your example with
CXL - 5000 and PMEM - 5100) that they will get assigned into same tier
most times?

Are you foreseeing that abstract distance that get mapped by sources
like HMAT would run into this issue?


 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-28 10:05    [W:0.059 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site