From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: ????????? <tianchen.dingtianc@alibaba-inc.com>
Cc: 'Ingo Molnar' <mingo@redhat.com>,
'Peter Zijlstra' <peterz@infradead.org>,
'Juri Lelli' <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
'Vincent Guittot' <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
'Dietmar Eggemann' <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
'Steven Rostedt' <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
'Ben Segall' <bsegall@google.com>,
'linux-kernel' <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
'??????' <yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] sched/numa: fix bug in update_task_scan_period
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2020 14:15:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200814131554.GH3510@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000401d6705b$eba56bf0$c2f043d0$@alibaba-inc.com>
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 11:51:54AM +0800, ????????? wrote:
> OK. Thanks for your advice and I'll use label instead.
> In the case of migration failures, if there are still new failures after
> clearing (meaning the node is still overloaded), the scanning period would
> be doubled, just like not using this patch. However, if the failures do not
> increase again, then the scanning period should be adjusted according to the
> following rules (i.e., ps and lr ratio). I believe this is the original
> design idea, right?
>
The original idea was to simply throttle scanning if the faults were
useless. Your patch is probably correct but I would still like to see
some evidence of the user-visible impact. What tests have you conducted
to make sure it behaves better (or is at least neutral in most cases)?
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-14 13:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-11 8:30 [RFC PATCH] sched/numa: fix bug in update_task_scan_period 丁天琛
2020-08-11 11:01 ` Mel Gorman
2020-08-12 3:51 ` 丁天琛
2020-08-14 13:15 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
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=20200814131554.GH3510@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tianchen.dingtianc@alibaba-inc.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
/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.