[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1337356192.573.75.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 17:49:52 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
pjt@...gle.com, bharata.rao@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Lee.Schermerhorn@...com, aarcange@...hat.com, danms@...ibm.com,
suresh.b.siddha@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/numa] sched/numa: Introduce sys_numa_{t,m}bind()
On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 10:47 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 18 May 2012, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2012-05-18 at 17:35 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I've also said many times over that I absolutely detest all the async
> > > stuff because it messes up accounting. And until someone comes up with a
> > > sane means of sorting that I'll stick to migrate-on-fault.
> >
> > The other nice advantage of migrate-on-fault is that you don't have to
> > play lifetime games with vmas. This much simplifies that aspect.
>
> The problem with migrate on fault in the past has been that there was no
> consistent benefit from the overhead added to the system. Useless page
> migration is a bit expensive.
I'm not sure I follow.. having the page local is a win, presuming you
can limit the migration rate to something low in relation to the cost of
remote accesses.
How does it matter how you migrate?
--
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