[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1341837624.3462.68.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 14:40:24 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Dan Smith <danms@...ibm.com>,
Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@...il.com>,
Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 14/26] sched, numa: Numa balancer
On Mon, 2012-07-09 at 14:23 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > It is not yet clear to me how and why your code converges.
>
> I don't think it does.. but since the scheduler interaction is fairly
> weak it doesn't matter too much from that pov.
>
That is,.. it slowly moves along with the cpu usage, only if there's a
lot of remote memory allocations (memory pressure) things get funny.
It'll try and rotate all tasks around a bit trying, but there's no good
solution for a memory hole on one node and a cpu hole on another, you're
going to have to take the remote hits.
Again.. what do we want it to do?
--
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