[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130731112510.GS2296@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 12:25:10 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, numa: Sanitize task_numa_fault() callsites
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:38:45PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> Subject: mm, numa: Sanitize task_numa_fault() callsites
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Date: Mon Jul 22 10:42:38 CEST 2013
>
> There are three callers of task_numa_fault():
>
> - do_huge_pmd_numa_page():
> Accounts against the current node, not the node where the
> page resides, unless we migrated, in which case it accounts
> against the node we migrated to.
>
> - do_numa_page():
> Accounts against the current node, not the node where the
> page resides, unless we migrated, in which case it accounts
> against the node we migrated to.
>
> - do_pmd_numa_page():
> Accounts not at all when the page isn't migrated, otherwise
> accounts against the node we migrated towards.
>
> This seems wrong to me; all three sites should have the same
> sementaics, furthermore we should accounts against where the page
> really is, we already know where the task is.
>
Agreed. To allow the scheduler parts to still be evaluated in proper
isolation I moved this patch to much earlier in the series.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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