From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/19] sched/numa: Evaluate move once per node
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 08:45:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180604154520.GB30328@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1528123887.7898.103.camel@surriel.com>
* Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com> [2018-06-04 10:51:27]:
> On Mon, 2018-06-04 at 15:30 +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
>
> Just bike shedding, but it may be easier to read
> if the "we found our destination" check were written
> more explicitly:
>
>
> if (!cur) {
> if (move && imp > env->best_imp)
> gote assign;
> else
> goto unlock;
> }
>
will incorporate this.
> Also, the "move" variable seems to indicate that
> the NUMA code may move the task, but not a decision
> that moving the task is better than a swap.
>
> Would it make sense to call it "maymove"?
Okay, will incorporate this too.
>
> I like how this patch simplifies the code a little.
>
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-04 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-06-04 10:00 [PATCH 00/19] Fixes for sched/numa_balancing Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 01/19] sched/numa: Remove redundant field Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 14:53 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:41 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 02/19] sched/numa: Evaluate move once per node Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 14:51 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 15:45 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 03/19] sched/numa: Simplify load_too_imbalanced Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 14:57 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:46 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 04/19] sched/numa: Set preferred_node based on best_cpu Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 12:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 12:53 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 12:59 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 13:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 13:48 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 14:37 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 15:56 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 05/19] sched/numa: Use task faults only if numa_group is not yet setup Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 13:09 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 06/19] sched/debug: Reverse the order of printing faults Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 16:28 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:50 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 07/19] sched/numa: Skip nodes that are at hoplimit Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 16:27 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:50 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 08/19] sched/numa: Remove unused task_capacity from numa_stats Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 16:28 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:57 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 09/19] sched/numa: Modify migrate_swap to accept additional params Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 17:00 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 8:58 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 10/19] sched/numa: Stop multiple tasks from moving to the cpu at the same time Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 17:57 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 9:51 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 11/19] sched/numa: Restrict migrating in parallel to the same node Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 17:59 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 9:53 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-06 12:58 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 12/19] sched:numa Remove numa_has_capacity Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 18:07 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 13/19] mm/migrate: Use xchg instead of spinlock Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 18:22 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 19:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-05 7:24 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-05 8:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 14/19] sched/numa: Updation of scan period need not be in lock Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 18:24 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 15/19] sched/numa: Use group_weights to identify if migration degrades locality Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 18:56 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 16/19] sched/numa: Detect if node actively handling migration Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 20:05 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 3:56 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-05 13:07 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-06 12:55 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-06 13:55 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-06 15:32 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-06 17:06 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 17/19] sched/numa: Pass destination cpu as a parameter to migrate_task_rq Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 18/19] sched/numa: Reset scan rate whenever task moves across nodes Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 20:08 ` Rik van Riel
2018-06-05 9:58 ` Mel Gorman
2018-06-06 13:47 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2018-06-04 10:00 ` [PATCH 19/19] sched/numa: Move task_placement closer to numa_migrate_preferred Srikar Dronamraju
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=20180604154520.GB30328@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.