[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d3ec7706-6560-70dd-d968-26460ce0c666@linux.ee>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 13:57:35 +0200
From: Meelis Roos <mroos@...ux.ee>
To: Barry Song <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>,
valentin.schneider@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
mgorman@...e.de, mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linuxarm@...neuler.org, xuwei5@...wei.com, liguozhu@...ilicon.com,
tiantao6@...ilicon.com, wanghuiqiang@...wei.com,
prime.zeng@...ilicon.com, jonathan.cameron@...wei.com,
guodong.xu@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched/topology: fix the issue groups don't span
domain->span for NUMA diameter > 2
03.02.21 13:12 Barry Song wrote:
> kernel/sched/topology.c | 85 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/topology.c b/kernel/sched/topology.c
> index 5d3675c7a76b..964ed89001fe 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/topology.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/topology.c
This one still works on the Sun X4600-M2, on top of v5.11-rc6-55-g3aaf0a27ffc2.
Performance-wise - is the some simple benhmark to run to meaure the impact? Compared to what - 5.10.0 or the kernel with the warning?
drop caches and time the build time of linux kernel with make -j64?
--
Meelis Roos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists