Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [v2 RFC PATCH 0/9] Another Approach to Use PMEM as NUMA Node | From | Yang Shi <> | Date | Tue, 16 Apr 2019 16:17:44 -0700 |
| |
On 4/16/19 4:04 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 4/16/19 2:59 PM, Yang Shi wrote: >> On 4/16/19 2:22 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: >>> Keith Busch had a set of patches to let you specify the demotion order >>> via sysfs for fun. The rules we came up with were: >>> 1. Pages keep no history of where they have been >>> 2. Each node can only demote to one other node >> Does this mean any remote node? Or just DRAM to PMEM, but remote PMEM >> might be ok? > In Keith's code, I don't think we differentiated. We let any node > demote to any other node you want, as long as it follows the cycle rule.
I recall Keith's code let the userspace define the target node. Anyway, we may need add one rule: not migrate-on-reclaim from PMEM node. Demoting from PMEM to DRAM sounds pointless.
| |