From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jose R. Santos" Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 16:56:29 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] NUMA boot hash allocation interleaving Message-Id: <20041220165629.GA21231@rx8.austin.ibm.com> List-Id: References: <50260000.1103061628@flay> <20041215045855.GH27225@wotan.suse.de> <20041215144730.GC24000@krispykreme.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20041216050248.GG32718@wotan.suse.de> <20041216051323.GI24000@krispykreme.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20041216141814.GA10292@rx8.austin.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <20041216141814.GA10292@rx8.austin.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Jose R. Santos" Cc: Anton Blanchard , Andi Kleen , "Martin J. Bligh" , Brent Casavant , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org Jose R. Santos [041216]: > I can do the SpecSFS runs but each runs takes several hours to complete > and I would need to do two runs (baseline and patched). I may have it > ready by today or tommorow. The difference between the two runs was with in noise of the benchmark on my small setup. I wont be able to get a larger NUMA system until next year, so I'll retest when that happens. In the mean time, I don't see a reason either to stall this patch, but that may change on I get numbers on a larger system. -JRS