linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: use node_page_state

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: <1f0d8933-60a3-e2e0-f7a3-36e98ade48bb@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Dec 2017 09:39:01 +0800
From:   kemi <kemi.wang@...el.com>
To:     Christopher Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        YASUAKI ISHIMATSU <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
        Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Dave <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...el.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@...el.com>, Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@...el.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: use node_page_state_snapshot to avoid
 deviation



On 2017年12月20日 23:58, Christopher Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, kemi wrote:
> 
>>> You are making numastats special and I yet haven't heard any sounds
>>> arguments for that. But that should be discussed in the respective
>>> patch.
>>>
>>
>> That is because we have much larger threshold size for NUMA counters, that means larger
>> deviation. So, the number in local cpus may not be simply ignored.
> 
> Some numbers showing the effect of these changes would be helpful. You can
> probably create some in kernel synthetic tests to start with which would
> allow you to see any significant effects of those changes.
> 
> Then run the larger testsuites (f.e. those that Mel has published) and
> benchmarks to figure out how behavior of real apps *may* change?
> 

OK.
I will do that when available.
Let's just drop this patch in this series and consider this issue
in another patch.