linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched,numa: weigh nearby nodes for task placement on complex NUMA topologies

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: <536CEE5E.9010609@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 09 May 2014 11:03:58 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org, mgorman@...e.de,
	chegu_vinod@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched,numa: weigh nearby nodes for task placement
 on complex NUMA topologies

On 05/09/2014 06:13 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 01:23:29PM -0400, riel@...hat.com wrote:
>> This patch does nothing on machines with simple NUMA topologies.
>
> Was this:
>
>> +	/*
>> +	 * No need to calculate a score if the system has a simple NUMA
>> +	 * topology, with no node distances between "local" and "far away".
>> +	 */
>> +	if (max_distance == LOCAL_DISTANCE)
>> +		return 0;
>
> Supposed to make that true?
>
> It doesn't. That test is a !numa test, not a fully connected test.
>

Look at patch 1/4.  I only set max_distance to !LOCAL_DISTANCE
if the system has multiple different distances in the SLIT
table.

I guess that needs to be cleaned up :)
--
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/