linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] Improve numa scheduling by consolidating tasks

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]

Date:	Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:10:21 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/10] Improve numa scheduling by consolidating tasks

On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 02:33:45PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> [2013-07-30 10:20:01]:
> 
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:17:55AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 01:18:15PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> > > > Here is an approach that looks to consolidate workloads across nodes.
> > > > This results in much improved performance. Again I would assume this work
> > > > is complementary to Mel's work with numa faulting.
> > > 
> > > I highly dislike the use of task weights here. It seems completely
> > > unrelated to the problem at hand.
> > 
> > I also don't particularly like the fact that it's purely process based.
> > The faults information we have gives much richer task relations.
> > 
> 
> With just pure fault information based approach, I am not seeing any
> major improvement in tasks/memory consolidation. I still see memory
> spread across different nodes and tasks getting ping-ponged to different
> nodes. And if there are multiple unrelated processes, then we see a mix
> of tasks of different processes in each of the node.

The fault thing isn't finished. Mel explicitly said it doesn't yet have
inter-task relations. And you run everything in a VM which is like a big
nasty mangler for anything sane.
--
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/