lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch
From
Date
On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 12:32 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 08:45:29PM +0200, Stefan Lankes wrote:
> > > Your patches seem to have a lot of overlap with
> > > Lee Schermerhorn's old migrate memory on cpu migration patches.
> > > I don't know the status of those.
> >
> > I analyze Lee Schermerhorn's migrate memory on cpu migration patches
> > (http://free.linux.hp.com/~lts/Patches/PageMigration/). I think that Lee
> > Schermerhorn add similar functionalities to the kernel. He called the
> > "affinity-on-next-touch" functionality "migrate_on_fault" and uses in his
> > patches the normal NUMA memory policies. Therefore, his solution fits better
> > to the Linux kernel. I tested his patches with our test applications and got
> > nearly the same performance results.
>
> That's great to know.
>
> I didn't think he had a per process setting though, did he?

Hi, Andi.

My patches don't have per process enablement. Rather, I chose to use
per cpuset enablement. I view cpusets as sort of "numa control groups"
and thought this was an appropriate level at which to control this sort
of behavior--analogous to memory_spread_{page|slab}. That probably
needs to be discussed more widely, tho'.

>
> > I found only patches for the kernel 2.6.25-rc2-mm1. Does someone develop
> > these patches further?
>
> Not to much knowledge. Maybe Lee will pick them up again now that there
> are more use cases.
>
> If he doesn't have time maybe you could update them?

As I mentioned earlier, I need to sort out the interaction with the
memory controller. It was changing too fast for me to keep up in the
time I could devote to it.

Lee



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-16 04:29    [W:0.119 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site