From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] introduce synchronize_sched_{enter,exit}()
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 18:38:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130930163810.GA25642@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130930125942.GB12926@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 09/30, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 08:36:34PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Why? Say, percpu_rw_semaphore, or upcoming changes in get_online_cpus(),
> > (Peter, I think they should be unified anyway, but lets ignore this for
> > now).
>
> If you think the percpu_rwsem users can benefit sure.. So far its good I
> didn't go the percpu_rwsem route for it looks like we got something
> better at the end of it ;-)
I think you could simply improve percpu_rwsem instead. Once we add
task_struct->cpuhp_ctr percpu_rwsem and get_online_cpus/hotplug_begin
becomes absolutely congruent.
OTOH, it would be simpler to change hotplug first, then copy-and-paste
the improvents into percpu_rwsem, then see if we can simply convert
cpu_hotplug_begin/end into percpu_down/up_write.
> Well, if we make percpu_rwsem the defacto container of the pattern and
> use that throughout, we'd have only a single implementation
Not sure. I think it can have other users. But even if not, please look
at "struct sb_writers". Yes, I believe it makes sense to use percpu_rwsem
here, but note that it is actually array of semaphores. I do not think
each element needs its own xxx_struct.
> and don't
> need the abstraction.
And even if struct percpu_rw_semaphore will be the only container of
xxx_struct, I think the code looks better and more understandable this
way, exactly because it adds the new abstraction layer. Performance-wise
this should be free.
> > static void cb_rcu_func(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> > {
> > struct xxx_struct *xxx = container_of(rcu, struct xxx_struct, cb_head);
> > long flags;
> >
> > BUG_ON(xxx->gp_state != GP_PASSED);
> > BUG_ON(xxx->cb_state == CB_IDLE);
> >
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&xxx->xxx_lock, flags);
> > if (xxx->gp_count) {
> > xxx->cb_state = CB_IDLE;
>
> This seems to be when a new xxx_begin() has happened after our last
> xxx_end() and the sync_sched() from xxx_begin() merges with the
> xxx_end() one and we're done.
Yes,
> > } else if (xxx->cb_state == CB_REPLAY) {
> > xxx->cb_state = CB_PENDING;
> > call_rcu_sched(&xxx->cb_head, cb_rcu_func);
>
> A later xxx_exit() has happened, and we need to requeue to catch a later
> GP.
Exactly.
> So I don't immediately see the point of the concurrent write side;
> percpu_rwsem wouldn't allow this and afaict neither would
> freeze_super().
Oh I disagree. Even ignoring the fact I believe xxx_struct itself
can have more users (I can be wrong of course), I do think that
percpu_down_write_nonexclusive() makes sense (except "exclusive"
should be the argument of percpu_init_rwsem). And in fact the
initial implementation I sent didn't even has the "exclusive" mode.
Please look at uprobes (currently the only user). We do not really
need the global write-lock, we can do the per-uprobe locking. However,
every caller needs to block the percpu_down_read() callers (dup_mmap).
> Other than that; yes this makes sense if you care about write side
> performance and I think its solid.
Great ;)
Oleg.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] introduce synchronize_sched_{enter,exit}()
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 18:38:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130930163810.GA25642@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130930125942.GB12926@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 09/30, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 08:36:34PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Why? Say, percpu_rw_semaphore, or upcoming changes in get_online_cpus(),
> > (Peter, I think they should be unified anyway, but lets ignore this for
> > now).
>
> If you think the percpu_rwsem users can benefit sure.. So far its good I
> didn't go the percpu_rwsem route for it looks like we got something
> better at the end of it ;-)
I think you could simply improve percpu_rwsem instead. Once we add
task_struct->cpuhp_ctr percpu_rwsem and get_online_cpus/hotplug_begin
becomes absolutely congruent.
OTOH, it would be simpler to change hotplug first, then copy-and-paste
the improvents into percpu_rwsem, then see if we can simply convert
cpu_hotplug_begin/end into percpu_down/up_write.
> Well, if we make percpu_rwsem the defacto container of the pattern and
> use that throughout, we'd have only a single implementation
Not sure. I think it can have other users. But even if not, please look
at "struct sb_writers". Yes, I believe it makes sense to use percpu_rwsem
here, but note that it is actually array of semaphores. I do not think
each element needs its own xxx_struct.
> and don't
> need the abstraction.
And even if struct percpu_rw_semaphore will be the only container of
xxx_struct, I think the code looks better and more understandable this
way, exactly because it adds the new abstraction layer. Performance-wise
this should be free.
> > static void cb_rcu_func(struct rcu_head *rcu)
> > {
> > struct xxx_struct *xxx = container_of(rcu, struct xxx_struct, cb_head);
> > long flags;
> >
> > BUG_ON(xxx->gp_state != GP_PASSED);
> > BUG_ON(xxx->cb_state == CB_IDLE);
> >
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&xxx->xxx_lock, flags);
> > if (xxx->gp_count) {
> > xxx->cb_state = CB_IDLE;
>
> This seems to be when a new xxx_begin() has happened after our last
> xxx_end() and the sync_sched() from xxx_begin() merges with the
> xxx_end() one and we're done.
Yes,
> > } else if (xxx->cb_state == CB_REPLAY) {
> > xxx->cb_state = CB_PENDING;
> > call_rcu_sched(&xxx->cb_head, cb_rcu_func);
>
> A later xxx_exit() has happened, and we need to requeue to catch a later
> GP.
Exactly.
> So I don't immediately see the point of the concurrent write side;
> percpu_rwsem wouldn't allow this and afaict neither would
> freeze_super().
Oh I disagree. Even ignoring the fact I believe xxx_struct itself
can have more users (I can be wrong of course), I do think that
percpu_down_write_nonexclusive() makes sense (except "exclusive"
should be the argument of percpu_init_rwsem). And in fact the
initial implementation I sent didn't even has the "exclusive" mode.
Please look at uprobes (currently the only user). We do not really
need the global write-lock, we can do the per-uprobe locking. However,
every caller needs to block the percpu_down_read() callers (dup_mmap).
> Other than that; yes this makes sense if you care about write side
> performance and I think its solid.
Great ;)
Oleg.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-30 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 361+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-10 9:31 [PATCH 0/50] Basic scheduler support for automatic NUMA balancing V7 Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 01/50] sched: monolithic code dump of what is being pushed upstream Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-11 0:58 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-09-11 0:58 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-09-11 3:11 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-11 3:11 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-13 8:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-13 8:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 02/50] mm: numa: Document automatic NUMA balancing sysctls Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 03/50] sched, numa: Comment fixlets Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 04/50] mm: numa: Do not account for a hinting fault if we raced Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 05/50] mm: Wait for THP migrations to complete during NUMA hinting faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 06/50] mm: Prevent parallel splits during THP migration Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 07/50] mm: Account for a THP NUMA hinting update as one PTE update Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 12:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 12:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 13:39 ` Rik van Riel
2013-09-16 13:39 ` Rik van Riel
2013-09-16 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 16:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 16:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 08/50] mm: numa: Sanitize task_numa_fault() callsites Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 09/50] mm: numa: Do not migrate or account for hinting faults on the zero page Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 10/50] sched: numa: Mitigate chance that same task always updates PTEs Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 11/50] sched: numa: Continue PTE scanning even if migrate rate limited Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 12/50] Revert "mm: sched: numa: Delay PTE scanning until a task is scheduled on a new node" Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 13/50] sched: numa: Initialise numa_next_scan properly Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 14/50] sched: Set the scan rate proportional to the memory usage of the task being scanned Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 15:40 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 15:40 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 15/50] sched: numa: Correct adjustment of numa_scan_period Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 16/50] mm: Only flush TLBs if a transhuge PMD is modified for NUMA pte scanning Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 17/50] mm: Do not flush TLB during protection change if !pte_present && !migration_entry Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-16 16:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-16 16:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 17:00 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 17:00 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 18/50] sched: numa: Slow scan rate if no NUMA hinting faults are being recorded Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` [PATCH 19/50] sched: Track NUMA hinting faults on per-node basis Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 20/50] sched: Select a preferred node with the most numa hinting faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 21/50] sched: Update NUMA hinting faults once per scan Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 22/50] sched: Favour moving tasks towards the preferred node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 23/50] sched: Resist moving tasks towards nodes with fewer hinting faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 24/50] sched: Reschedule task on preferred NUMA node once selected Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 25/50] sched: Add infrastructure for split shared/private accounting of NUMA hinting faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 26/50] sched: Check current->mm before allocating NUMA faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 27/50] mm: numa: Scan pages with elevated page_mapcount Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-12 2:10 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-12 2:10 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-13 8:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-13 8:11 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 28/50] sched: Remove check that skips small VMAs Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 29/50] sched: Set preferred NUMA node based on number of private faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 30/50] sched: Do not migrate memory immediately after switching node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 31/50] sched: Avoid overloading CPUs on a preferred NUMA node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 32/50] sched: Retry migration of tasks to CPU on a preferred node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 33/50] sched: numa: increment numa_migrate_seq when task runs in correct location Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 34/50] sched: numa: Do not trap hinting faults for shared libraries Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 2:02 ` 答复: " 张天飞
2013-09-17 8:05 ` ????: " Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 8:05 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 8:22 ` Figo.zhang
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 35/50] mm: numa: Only trap pmd hinting faults if we would otherwise trap PTE faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 36/50] stop_machine: Introduce stop_two_cpus() Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 37/50] sched: Introduce migrate_swap() Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 14:30 ` [PATCH] hotplug: Optimize {get,put}_online_cpus() Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 14:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 16:20 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 16:20 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-17 16:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 16:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-18 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-18 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-19 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-19 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-21 16:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-21 16:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-21 19:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-21 19:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-23 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 9:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 17:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-23 17:32 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 20:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 20:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 21:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 21:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 15:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 15:55 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 16:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-25 16:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-25 17:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 17:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 17:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 17:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 18:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 18:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 21:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-25 21:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-26 11:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 11:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <20130926155321.GA4342@redhat.com>
2013-09-26 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 16:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 16:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 16:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 16:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-26 17:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-26 17:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 18:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-27 18:15 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-27 20:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-27 20:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-28 12:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-28 12:48 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-28 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-28 14:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-28 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-28 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 20:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-09-30 20:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-10-01 17:11 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 17:11 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 17:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 17:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 17:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 17:45 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 18:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 18:07 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 19:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 19:05 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-02 12:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 12:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 12:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 12:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 12:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 12:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 13:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 13:31 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 14:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 14:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 15:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 15:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 17:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-02 17:52 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 19:03 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 19:03 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 18:14 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 18:14 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 18:56 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-01 18:56 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-02 10:14 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-10-02 10:14 ` Srivatsa S. Bhat
2013-09-28 20:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-28 20:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 3:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 3:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 14:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 14:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 14:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 14:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 14:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 14:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-01 15:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 15:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 15:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 15:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 15:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 15:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-29 13:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-29 13:56 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 15:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 15:38 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 15:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 15:40 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-01 20:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-10-01 20:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-23 14:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 14:50 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 14:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 15:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 15:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 15:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 15:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 15:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-23 16:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 16:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 15:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-23 15:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-23 16:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 16:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 17:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-23 17:04 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-23 17:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 17:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-23 17:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-23 17:50 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 12:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 12:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 14:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 14:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 16:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 16:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 21:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 21:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 16:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 16:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 16:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-24 16:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-24 17:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 17:06 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 17:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 17:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 18:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 18:00 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 20:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 20:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 15:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 15:16 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 15:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 15:35 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-25 16:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-25 16:33 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 16:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 16:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-24 16:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 16:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 17:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 17:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-24 16:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 16:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-24 16:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-24 16:39 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-29 18:36 ` [RFC] introduce synchronize_sched_{enter,exit}() Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-29 18:36 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-29 20:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-29 20:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2013-09-30 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 12:42 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-29 21:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-29 21:34 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-09-30 13:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 13:03 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 14:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 14:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 15:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 15:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-30 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 16:58 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-09-30 16:38 ` Oleg Nesterov [this message]
2013-09-30 16:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2013-10-02 14:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-02 14:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-03 7:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-03 7:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-10-03 7:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-10-03 7:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 14:32 ` [PATCH 37/50] sched: Introduce migrate_swap() Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-17 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 38/50] sched: numa: Use a system-wide search to find swap/migration candidates Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 39/50] sched: numa: Favor placing a task on the preferred node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 40/50] mm: numa: Change page last {nid,pid} into {cpu,pid} Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 41/50] sched: numa: Use {cpu, pid} to create task groups for shared faults Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-12 12:42 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-12 12:42 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-12 14:40 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-12 14:40 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-12 12:45 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-12 12:45 ` Hillf Danton
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 42/50] sched: numa: Report a NUMA task group ID Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 43/50] mm: numa: Do not group on RO pages Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 44/50] sched: numa: stay on the same node if CLONE_VM Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 45/50] sched: numa: use group fault statistics in numa placement Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 46/50] sched: numa: Prevent parallel updates to group stats during placement Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-20 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-20 9:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-20 12:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-20 12:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-20 12:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-20 12:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-20 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-20 13:31 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 47/50] sched: numa: add debugging Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 48/50] sched: numa: Decide whether to favour task or group weights based on swap candidate relationships Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 49/50] sched: numa: fix task or group comparison Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` [PATCH 50/50] sched: numa: Avoid migrating tasks that are placed on their preferred node Mel Gorman
2013-09-10 9:32 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-11 2:03 ` [PATCH 0/50] Basic scheduler support for automatic NUMA balancing V7 Rik van Riel
2013-09-14 2:57 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-14 2:57 ` Bob Liu
2013-09-30 10:30 ` Mel Gorman
2013-09-30 10:30 ` Mel Gorman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130930163810.GA25642@redhat.com \
--to=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.