Merge tag 'mm-stable-2022-08-03' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm

Pull MM updates from Andrew Morton:
 "Most of the MM queue. A few things are still pending.

  Liam's maple tree rework didn't make it. This has resulted in a few
  other minor patch series being held over for next time.

  Multi-gen LRU still isn't merged as we were waiting for mapletree to
  stabilize. The current plan is to merge MGLRU into -mm soon and to
  later reintroduce mapletree, with a view to hopefully getting both
  into 6.1-rc1.

  Summary:

   - The usual batches of cleanups from Baoquan He, Muchun Song, Miaohe
     Lin, Yang Shi, Anshuman Khandual and Mike Rapoport

   - Some kmemleak fixes from Patrick Wang and Waiman Long

   - DAMON updates from SeongJae Park

   - memcg debug/visibility work from Roman Gushchin

   - vmalloc speedup from Uladzislau Rezki

   - more folio conversion work from Matthew Wilcox

   - enhancements for coherent device memory mapping from Alex Sierra

   - addition of shared pages tracking and CoW support for fsdax, from
     Shiyang Ruan

   - hugetlb optimizations from Mike Kravetz

   - Mel Gorman has contributed some pagealloc changes to improve
     latency and realtime behaviour.

   - mprotect soft-dirty checking has been improved by Peter Xu

   - Many other singleton patches all over the place"

 [ XFS merge from hell as per Darrick Wong in

   https://lore.kernel.org/all/YshKnxb4VwXycPO8@magnolia/ ]

* tag 'mm-stable-2022-08-03' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm: (282 commits)
  tools/testing/selftests/vm/hmm-tests.c: fix build
  mm: Kconfig: fix typo
  mm: memory-failure: convert to pr_fmt()
  mm: use is_zone_movable_page() helper
  hugetlbfs: fix inaccurate comment in hugetlbfs_statfs()
  hugetlbfs: cleanup some comments in inode.c
  hugetlbfs: remove unneeded header file
  hugetlbfs: remove unneeded hugetlbfs_ops forward declaration
  hugetlbfs: use helper macro SZ_1{K,M}
  mm: cleanup is_highmem()
  mm/hmm: add a test for cross device private faults
  selftests: add soft-dirty into run_vmtests.sh
  selftests: soft-dirty: add test for mprotect
  mm/mprotect: fix soft-dirty check in can_change_pte_writable()
  mm: memcontrol: fix potential oom_lock recursion deadlock
  mm/gup.c: fix formatting in check_and_migrate_movable_page()
  xfs: fail dax mount if reflink is enabled on a partition
  mm/memcontrol.c: remove the redundant updating of stats_flush_threshold
  userfaultfd: don't fail on unrecognized features
  hugetlb_cgroup: fix wrong hugetlb cgroup numa stat
  ...

1 files changed, 150 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/mm/numa.rst b/Documentation/mm/numa.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..99fdeca917ca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/mm/numa.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
+.. _numa:
+
+Started Nov 1999 by Kanoj Sarcar <kanoj@sgi.com>
+
+=============
+What is NUMA?
+=============
+
+This question can be answered from a couple of perspectives:  the
+hardware view and the Linux software view.
+
+From the hardware perspective, a NUMA system is a computer platform that
+comprises multiple components or assemblies each of which may contain 0
+or more CPUs, local memory, and/or IO buses.  For brevity and to
+disambiguate the hardware view of these physical components/assemblies
+from the software abstraction thereof, we'll call the components/assemblies
+'cells' in this document.
+
+Each of the 'cells' may be viewed as an SMP [symmetric multi-processor] subset
+of the system--although some components necessary for a stand-alone SMP system
+may not be populated on any given cell.   The cells of the NUMA system are
+connected together with some sort of system interconnect--e.g., a crossbar or
+point-to-point link are common types of NUMA system interconnects.  Both of
+these types of interconnects can be aggregated to create NUMA platforms with
+cells at multiple distances from other cells.
+
+For Linux, the NUMA platforms of interest are primarily what is known as Cache
+Coherent NUMA or ccNUMA systems.   With ccNUMA systems, all memory is visible
+to and accessible from any CPU attached to any cell and cache coherency
+is handled in hardware by the processor caches and/or the system interconnect.
+
+Memory access time and effective memory bandwidth varies depending on how far
+away the cell containing the CPU or IO bus making the memory access is from the
+cell containing the target memory.  For example, access to memory by CPUs
+attached to the same cell will experience faster access times and higher
+bandwidths than accesses to memory on other, remote cells.  NUMA platforms
+can have cells at multiple remote distances from any given cell.
+
+Platform vendors don't build NUMA systems just to make software developers'
+lives interesting.  Rather, this architecture is a means to provide scalable
+memory bandwidth.  However, to achieve scalable memory bandwidth, system and
+application software must arrange for a large majority of the memory references
+[cache misses] to be to "local" memory--memory on the same cell, if any--or
+to the closest cell with memory.
+
+This leads to the Linux software view of a NUMA system:
+
+Linux divides the system's hardware resources into multiple software
+abstractions called "nodes".  Linux maps the nodes onto the physical cells
+of the hardware platform, abstracting away some of the details for some
+architectures.  As with physical cells, software nodes may contain 0 or more
+CPUs, memory and/or IO buses.  And, again, memory accesses to memory on
+"closer" nodes--nodes that map to closer cells--will generally experience
+faster access times and higher effective bandwidth than accesses to more
+remote cells.
+
+For some architectures, such as x86, Linux will "hide" any node representing a
+physical cell that has no memory attached, and reassign any CPUs attached to
+that cell to a node representing a cell that does have memory.  Thus, on
+these architectures, one cannot assume that all CPUs that Linux associates with
+a given node will see the same local memory access times and bandwidth.
+
+In addition, for some architectures, again x86 is an example, Linux supports
+the emulation of additional nodes.  For NUMA emulation, linux will carve up
+the existing nodes--or the system memory for non-NUMA platforms--into multiple
+nodes.  Each emulated node will manage a fraction of the underlying cells'
+physical memory.  NUMA emluation is useful for testing NUMA kernel and
+application features on non-NUMA platforms, and as a sort of memory resource
+management mechanism when used together with cpusets.
+[see Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst]
+
+For each node with memory, Linux constructs an independent memory management
+subsystem, complete with its own free page lists, in-use page lists, usage
+statistics and locks to mediate access.  In addition, Linux constructs for
+each memory zone [one or more of DMA, DMA32, NORMAL, HIGH_MEMORY, MOVABLE],
+an ordered "zonelist".  A zonelist specifies the zones/nodes to visit when a
+selected zone/node cannot satisfy the allocation request.  This situation,
+when a zone has no available memory to satisfy a request, is called
+"overflow" or "fallback".
+
+Because some nodes contain multiple zones containing different types of
+memory, Linux must decide whether to order the zonelists such that allocations
+fall back to the same zone type on a different node, or to a different zone
+type on the same node.  This is an important consideration because some zones,
+such as DMA or DMA32, represent relatively scarce resources.  Linux chooses
+a default Node ordered zonelist. This means it tries to fallback to other zones
+from the same node before using remote nodes which are ordered by NUMA distance.
+
+By default, Linux will attempt to satisfy memory allocation requests from the
+node to which the CPU that executes the request is assigned.  Specifically,
+Linux will attempt to allocate from the first node in the appropriate zonelist
+for the node where the request originates.  This is called "local allocation."
+If the "local" node cannot satisfy the request, the kernel will examine other
+nodes' zones in the selected zonelist looking for the first zone in the list
+that can satisfy the request.
+
+Local allocation will tend to keep subsequent access to the allocated memory
+"local" to the underlying physical resources and off the system interconnect--
+as long as the task on whose behalf the kernel allocated some memory does not
+later migrate away from that memory.  The Linux scheduler is aware of the
+NUMA topology of the platform--embodied in the "scheduling domains" data
+structures [see Documentation/scheduler/sched-domains.rst]--and the scheduler
+attempts to minimize task migration to distant scheduling domains.  However,
+the scheduler does not take a task's NUMA footprint into account directly.
+Thus, under sufficient imbalance, tasks can migrate between nodes, remote
+from their initial node and kernel data structures.
+
+System administrators and application designers can restrict a task's migration
+to improve NUMA locality using various CPU affinity command line interfaces,
+such as taskset(1) and numactl(1), and program interfaces such as
+sched_setaffinity(2).  Further, one can modify the kernel's default local
+allocation behavior using Linux NUMA memory policy. [see
+:ref:`Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numa_memory_policy.rst <numa_memory_policy>`].
+
+System administrators can restrict the CPUs and nodes' memories that a non-
+privileged user can specify in the scheduling or NUMA commands and functions
+using control groups and CPUsets.  [see Documentation/admin-guide/cgroup-v1/cpusets.rst]
+
+On architectures that do not hide memoryless nodes, Linux will include only
+zones [nodes] with memory in the zonelists.  This means that for a memoryless
+node the "local memory node"--the node of the first zone in CPU's node's
+zonelist--will not be the node itself.  Rather, it will be the node that the
+kernel selected as the nearest node with memory when it built the zonelists.
+So, default, local allocations will succeed with the kernel supplying the
+closest available memory.  This is a consequence of the same mechanism that
+allows such allocations to fallback to other nearby nodes when a node that
+does contain memory overflows.
+
+Some kernel allocations do not want or cannot tolerate this allocation fallback
+behavior.  Rather they want to be sure they get memory from the specified node
+or get notified that the node has no free memory.  This is usually the case when
+a subsystem allocates per CPU memory resources, for example.
+
+A typical model for making such an allocation is to obtain the node id of the
+node to which the "current CPU" is attached using one of the kernel's
+numa_node_id() or CPU_to_node() functions and then request memory from only
+the node id returned.  When such an allocation fails, the requesting subsystem
+may revert to its own fallback path.  The slab kernel memory allocator is an
+example of this.  Or, the subsystem may choose to disable or not to enable
+itself on allocation failure.  The kernel profiling subsystem is an example of
+this.
+
+If the architecture supports--does not hide--memoryless nodes, then CPUs
+attached to memoryless nodes would always incur the fallback path overhead
+or some subsystems would fail to initialize if they attempted to allocated
+memory exclusively from a node without memory.  To support such
+architectures transparently, kernel subsystems can use the numa_mem_id()
+or cpu_to_mem() function to locate the "local memory node" for the calling or
+specified CPU.  Again, this is the same node from which default, local page
+allocations will be attempted.