[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ef8a701-fe8a-cf65-5b72-806b244aae8b@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 11:23:00 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
dan.j.williams@...el.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] mm/numa: automatically generate node migration
order
On 6/30/20 1:22 AM, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> + /*
>> + * To avoid cycles in the migration "graph", ensure
>> + * that migration sources are not future targets by
>> + * setting them in 'used_targets'.
>> + *
>> + * But, do this only once per pass so that multiple
>> + * source nodes can share a target node.
> establish_migrate_target() calls find_next_best_node(), which will set
> target_node in used_targets. So it seems that the nodes_or() below is
> only necessary to initialize used_targets, and multiple source nodes
> cannot share one target node in current implementation.
Yes, that is true. My focus on this implementation was simplicity and
sanity for common configurations. I can certainly imagine scenarios
where this is suboptimal.
I'm totally open to other ways of doing this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists