[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1337357041.573.86.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 18:04:01 +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 11:00 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Having the page local is a win if there are a sufficient number of
> accesses to amortize the effort to move the page. Given the expensive
> nature of page migration there would need to be a large number of accesses
> to a page to justify the effort.
Right, but this is true of any migration scheme and not specific to MoF.
> > How does it matter how you migrate?
>
> Migrate on fault incurs two types of costs:
>
> 1. Unmapping. This results in additional faults to reestablish the ptes.
>
> 2. Actual lazy migrate. More faults. Now the page needs to be copied to
> the new node and the actual migration work is done.
Nah, only the 1 fault is extra. Regular migration already needs to unmap
and copy and reinstate, so the only extra work is the fault to trigger
it.
--
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