linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Automatic NUMA Balancing V11

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: <CA+55aFzedbhcuo-WObUjigrXGuG2VGLqDOvh_HFA9Cn_BRkwjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 16 Dec 2012 15:19:20 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>, Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Alex Shi <lkml.alex@...il.com>,
	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Automatic NUMA Balancing V11

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de> wrote:
> This is a pull request for "Automatic NUMA Balancing V11". The list

Ok, guys, I've pulled this and pushed out. There were some conflicts
with both the VM changes and with the scheduler tree, but they were
pretty small and looked simple, so I fixed them up and hope they all
work.

Has anybody tested the impact on single-node systems? If distros
enable this by default (and it does have 'default y', which is a big
no-no for new features - I undid that part) then there will be tons of
people running this without actually having multiple sockets. Does it
gracefully avoid pointless overheads for this case?

Anyway, hopefully we'll have a more real numa balancing for 3.9, and
this is still considered a reasonable base for that work.

                  Linus
--
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/