lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 00:47:17 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com> To: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] page reclaim throttle take2 On Wed, 27 Feb 2008, Balbir Singh wrote: > Let's forget node hotplug for the moment, but what if someone > > 1. Changes the machine configuration and adds more nodes, do we expect the > kernel to be recompiled? Or is it easier to update /etc/sysctl.conf? > 2. Uses fake NUMA nodes and increases/decreases the number of nodes across > reboots. Should the kernel be recompiled? > That is why the proposal was made to make this a static configuration option, such as CONFIG_NUM_RECLAIM_THREADS_PER_NODE, that will handle both situations. > I am afraid it doesn't. Consider as you scale number of CPU's with the same > amount of memory, we'll end up making the reclaim problem worse. > The benchmark that have been posted suggest that memory locality is more important than lock contention, as I've already mentioned. David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists