linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6 7/7] docs: mm: numaperf.rst Add brief description for access class 1.

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: <20191218143725.00002f6f@Huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Dec 2019 14:37:25 +0000
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>
CC:     <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>, <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Tao Xu <tao3.xu@...el.com>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
        Hanjun Guo <guohanjun@...wei.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 7/7] docs: mm: numaperf.rst Add brief description for
 access class 1.

On Wed, 18 Dec 2019 12:34:34 +0100
Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com> wrote:

> Le 16/12/2019 à 16:38, Jonathan Cameron a écrit :
> > Try to make minimal changes to the document which already describes
> > access class 0 in a generic fashion (including IO initiatiors that
> > are not CPUs).
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.rst | 8 ++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.rst
> > index a80c3c37226e..327c0d72692d 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/mm/numaperf.rst
> > @@ -56,6 +56,11 @@ nodes' access characteristics share the same performance relative to other
> >  linked initiator nodes. Each target within an initiator's access class,
> >  though, do not necessarily perform the same as each other.
> >  
> > +The access class "1" is used to allow differentiation between initiators
> > +that are CPUs and hence suitable for generic task scheduling, and
> > +IO initiators such as GPUs and CPUs.  Unlike access class 0, only
> > +nodes containing CPUs are considered.
> > +
> >  ================
> >  NUMA Performance
> >  ================
> > @@ -88,6 +93,9 @@ The latency attributes are provided in nanoseconds.
> >  The values reported here correspond to the rated latency and bandwidth
> >  for the platform.
> >  
> > +Access class 0, takes the same form, but only includes values for CPU to
> > +memory activity.  
> 
> 
> Shouldn't this be "class 1" here?
> 
Good point.

Jonathan

> Both hunks look contradictory to me.
> 
> Brice
> 
>