linux-kernel - Re: [patch v3]numa: add a sysctl to control interleave allocation granularity from each node to improve I/O performance

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1112131412320.27186@router.home>
Date:	Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:12:58 -0600 (CST)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
cc:	Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@...el.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, lee.schermerhorn@...com,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v3]numa: add a sysctl to control interleave allocation
 granularity from each node to improve I/O performance

On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Andi Kleen wrote:

> I would prefer to add a new policy (INTERLEAVE_MULTI or so) for this
> instead of a global sysctl, that takes the additional parameter.

That would require a change of all scripts and code that uses
MPOL_INTERLEAVE. Lets not do that.

> Also I don't like having more per task state. Could you compute this
> from the address instead even for the process policy case?

That sounds good.

--
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/