[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] AutoNUMA alpha6

* Andrea Arcangeli <> wrote:

> [...]
> So give me a break... you must have made a real mess in your
> benchmarking. numasched is always doing worse than upstream
> here, in fact two times massively worse. Almost as bad as the
> inverse binds.

Andrea, please stop attacking the messenger.

We wanted and needed more testing, and I'm glad that we got it.

Can we please figure out all the details *without* accusing
anyone of having made a mess? It is quite possible as well that
*you* made a mess of it somewhere, either at the conceptual
stage or at the implementational stage, right?

numasched getting close to the hard binding numbers is pretty
much what I'd expect to see from it: it is an
automatic/intelligent CPU and memory affinity (and migration)
method to approximate the results of manual hard binding of



 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-21 08:15    [W:0.120 / U:1.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site