From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Cc: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Kirill A Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] mm: numa: Do not mark PTEs pte_numa when splitting huge pages
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:28:39 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <542DA767.3000601@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFzNGCiaL5fWpi_-JJXBhCuS+6CgUa0GpmFHRWWTGXp4fQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/02/2014 03:26 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov
> <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
>>
>> I believe Sasha uses fakenuma in his KVM for that.
>
> Ok, so the benchmarks won't do anything then.
>
> I mean, I guess they might show some of the migration overhead, but
> they won't show the actual end result in any meaningful manner, since
> memory isn't actually NUMA.
Both autonuma and "perf bench numa mem" mostly tell us how
quickly the kernel manages to locate tasks and their memory
on the nodes where they belong, without doing much in the
way of NUMA performance measuring.
They are more useful as sanity tests than anything else.
"Does the kernel still properly place each process on its
own node, and how quickly does it do that?"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-02 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-02 13:29 [PATCH 0/4] NUMA balancing related fixlets Mel Gorman
2014-10-02 13:29 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: remove misleading ARCH_USES_NUMA_PROT_NONE (from Andrew's tree) Mel Gorman
2014-10-02 13:29 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: migrate: Close race between migration completion and mprotect Mel Gorman
2014-10-02 15:48 ` Rik van Riel
2014-10-02 16:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-02 13:29 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: mempolicy: Skip inaccessible VMAs when setting MPOL_MF_LAZY Mel Gorman
2014-10-02 15:51 ` Rik van Riel
2014-10-02 13:29 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: numa: Do not mark PTEs pte_numa when splitting huge pages Mel Gorman
2014-10-02 15:18 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2014-10-02 16:19 ` Rik van Riel
2014-10-02 16:36 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-02 18:58 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-02 19:03 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-02 19:07 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2014-10-02 19:12 ` Sasha Levin
2014-10-02 19:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2014-10-02 19:28 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2014-10-02 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
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=542DA767.3000601@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sasha.levin@oracle.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=walken@google.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.