linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/19] mm: numa: Add fault driven placement and migration

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <509967D9.7050706@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 06 Nov 2012 14:41:13 -0500
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/19] mm: numa: Add fault driven placement and migration

On 11/06/2012 04:14 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
>
> NOTE: This patch is based on "sched, numa, mm: Add fault driven
> 	placement and migration policy" but as it throws away all the policy
> 	to just leave a basic foundation I had to drop the signed-offs-by.
>
> This patch creates a bare-bones method for setting PTEs pte_numa in the
> context of the scheduler that when faulted later will be faulted onto the
> node the CPU is running on.  In itself this does nothing useful but any
> placement policy will fundamentally depend on receiving hints on placement
> from fault context and doing something intelligent about it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>

Excellent basis for implementing a smarter NUMA
policy.

Not sure if such a policy should be implemented
as a replacement for this patch, or on top of it...

Either way, thank you for cleaning up all of the
NUMA base code, while I was away at conferences
and stuck in airports :)

Peter, Andrea - does this look like a good basis
for implementing and comparing your NUMA policies?

I mean, it does to me. I am just wondering if there
is any reason at all you two could not use it as a
basis for an apples-to-apples comparison of your
NUMA placement policies?

Sharing 2/3 of the code would sure get rid of the
bulk of the discussion, and allow us to make real
progress.

--
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/