[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100429035718.GT4920@sgi.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:57:18 -0500
From: Robin Holt <holt@....com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] - Randomize node rotor used in
cpuset_mem_spread_node()
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 03:40:34PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2010 10:04:32 -0500
> Jack Steiner <steiner@....com> wrote:
>
> > Some workloads that create a large number of small files tend to assign
> > too many pages to node 0 (multi-node systems). Part of the reason is that
> > the rotor (in cpuset_mem_spread_node()) used to assign nodes starts
> > at node 0 for newly created tasks.
>
> And, presumably, your secret testcase forks lots of subprocesses which
> do the file creation?
I think the test case he was using was aim7 or a kernel compile.
Anything that opens a lot of small files will quickly deplete node 0.
> > This patch changes the rotor to be initialized to a random node number
> > of the cpuset.
>
> Why random as opposed to, say, inherit-rotor-from-parent?
If I have something like a find ... -exec grep ..., won't the pages
be biased towards the nodes adjacent to the parent's rotor values.
Maybe I misunderstood Jack's problem, but I believe that was what he
was seeing and why he chose random.
I hope I did not misunderstand Jack's problem and mislead this discussion.
Thanks,
Robin Holt
--
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