From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.127.230.111 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793242182; b=wWjpr9KznALc37j7Yeev4M1B52Qh+W9nD4vRwTn1WWciLebESRQPLvir+RQjCLIHInCp WAHz2Bn8oQoKJOt41ExbkktVYNHCi3ejcAnmCrrX6aWDJa4oXqgdOf6ZMmIyn6QQlngjh RK/chqAANx5CBQ3sgpmHjNVmjbjdaO7Z4W4KBlJchgeN1pp1u14xf1rBL37Zk+xoENedv zu7ApNKEhTR6Cs39Nli2kqlZM+EVQ1ZUg53tcK2WANkPHom1kl910dKXJuErzcXLS6+o3 OkVRcdNduw4+9U5n/pkbYDmBrDzfd1qtaNjpqXPtTXOcJDUFnLep/Z7t4duKMEvTYxw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793242182; h=DMARC-Filter:DKIM-Signature:Content-Type:Cc:From:Message-Id: Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To: User-Agent:X-Lms-Return-Path:References:X-Original-From; bh=hTvlG/Tq8WG71QR3KEeqZ4U9dHyqctWa0aSN+5Yu23w=; b=cTDeDgHMyDkjRiLbo0KyvGuNVTaTW1m2swFHD/2X2S5O+n8AZ07RrIfqurqoKLua+8+p cXqENVbTglgDt1KM3HcN/ZbcfdeVz0QOc+MZ5AYvl4PcoRqKit8O0DWLRp00x7IEKUBhx VawxSPbthGlnKvamqVZ0JsoXzq9O4GdoCmcFJJ15xKhGh1o1uwNVwp6WQb7JFC7x7JhEs vzx5m2MMa0L6w0pwAmgx1zLgw1MUoLDEmaGQI69I7THZ0EhMaUZepjHUBI3iSz6PJaRNL Awt3iAjeivYtG3bvjCUE2cFKPdIgpOlIf50UxDkdZxIaPw5s04uTV2tpz7E1ZUEKdIA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=bytedance.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bytedance.com; dkim=pass header.d=bytedance.com header.i=@bytedance.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2212171451 header.b=hdocmnqL; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.127.230.111 Received: from va-1-111.ptr.blmpb.com (va-1-111.ptr.blmpb.com [209.127.230.111]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDB72606A31C for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2026 02:49:40 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org BDB72606A31C Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=bytedance.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=bytedance.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=bytedance.com header.i=@bytedance.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=2212171451 header.b=hdocmnqL DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=2212171451; d=bytedance.com; t=1793242171; h=from:subject: mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc:reply-to:content-type: mime-version:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=hTvlG/Tq8WG71QR3KEeqZ4U9dHyqctWa0aSN+5Yu23w=; b=hdocmnqL7Au86xutXGj5AxJd6L2RQ9zUDLfyiIK1GwmRJCNJFLwJJpn593fjdbY0zCEJQ7 1MoC3D7EjToaXcsv+jHn0WflqUguMcKiWxbklah2aPqhNGVtthA/8mWqBPat/mNyWI2M/q eqAsetgnmchrJdyRa/L9NLPJvQu6F9zuDHT9k0qAqIBmYRQwf91FDM9XfQAXhxiAKZEzcy 2VQxwFYLfijiNlYczQRbgst121FvVhB8Zq5uAnENx4ZbcoAw60fw6W4zNZX/BmXw7p6XrJ i3+Xw0N4W6cA6duLzeY0VT2yJYKVqRtKcbdXChcWgcCo3dGaSBPKxQHhJKnOgQ== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , From: "Li Zhe" Message-Id: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: "Peter Zijlstra" , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] sched/numa: refine memory tiering promotion heuristics Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2026 10:49:03 +0800 In-Reply-To: <20261028092004.GG2668804@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird X-Lms-Return-Path: References: <20261028041253.74839-1-lizhe.67@bytedance.com> <20261028092004.GG2668804@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Original-From: Li Zhe On 10/28/26 5:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 12:12:50PM +0800, Li Zhe wrote: >> This version narrows the series to memory tiering. The generic normal >> NUMA balancing cleanups and heuristic changes from v1 are not included. > Should we not look at Bharata's pghot stuff first and untangle this numa > balancing vs tiering nonsense, before making an even bigger mess of > things? I agree that pghot is relevant to the longer-term direction.=C2=A0 My understanding is that the two ideas are not conflicting with each other: this series tries to refine the current NUMA-balancing-based tiering implementation, while pghot would be a larger rework of the promotion infrastructure. Let's also copy Bharata here so he is aware of this discussion. Based on Joshua's comment, I can also split patch 2 out as a standalone fix with a proper Fixes tag, and keep patches 1 and 3 for the broader tiering heuristic discussion. Thanks, Zhe