Thread (177 messages) 177 messages, 16 authors, 2012-07-14

Re: [PATCH 13/40] autonuma: CPU follow memory algorithm

From: Peter Zijlstra <hidden>
Date: 2012-06-29 18:52:24
Also in: lkml

On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:46 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
quoted
I've also stated several times that forceful migration in the context of
numa balancing must go.
I am not convinced about this part either way.

I do not see how a migration numa thread (which could potentially
use idle cpu time) will be any worse than migrate on fault, which
will always take away time from the userspace process. 
Any NUMA stuff is long term, it really shouldn't matter on the timescale
of a few jiffies.

NUMA placement should also not over-ride fairness, esp. not by default.

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help