linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: Improve load balancing on AMD EPYC

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:   Fri, 28 Jun 2019 16:15:08 +0100
From:   Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To:     "Suthikulpanit, Suravee" <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>
Cc:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/topology: Improve load balancing on AMD EPYC

On Wed, 26 Jun, at 09:18:01PM, Suthikulpanit, Suravee wrote:
> 
> We use 16 to designate 1-hop latency (for different node within the same socket).
> For across-socket access, since the latency is greater, we set the latency to 32
> (twice the latency of 1-hop) not aware of the RECLAIM_DISTANCE at the time.
 
I guess the question is: Is the memory latency of a remote node 1 hop
away 1.6x the local node latency?