From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx127.postini.com [74.125.245.127]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 33D986B0044 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 08:31:50 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-bk0-f41.google.com with SMTP id jg9so4523078bkc.14 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 05:31:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:31:38 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: numa/core regressions fixed - more testers wanted Message-ID: <20121123133138.GA28058@gmail.com> References: <20121119162909.GL8218@suse.de> <20121119191339.GA11701@gmail.com> <20121119211804.GM8218@suse.de> <20121119223604.GA13470@gmail.com> <20121120071704.GA14199@gmail.com> <20121120152933.GA17996@gmail.com> <20121120175647.GA23532@gmail.com> <20121122012122.GA7938@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121122012122.GA7938@gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Alex Shi Cc: Linus Torvalds , David Rientjes , Mel Gorman , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-mm , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Turner , Lee Schermerhorn , Christoph Lameter , Rik van Riel , Andrew Morton , Andrea Arcangeli , Thomas Gleixner , Johannes Weiner , Hugh Dickins * Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Alex Shi wrote: > > > > > > > Those of you who would like to test all the latest patches are > > > welcome to pick up latest bits at tip:master: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git master > > > > > > > I am wondering if it is a problem, but it still exists on HEAD: c418de93e39891 > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90131/match=compiled+with+name+pl+and+start+it+on+my > > > > like when just start 4 pl tasks, often 3 were running on node > > 0, and 1 was running on node 1. The old balance will average > > assign tasks to different node, different core. > > This is "normal" in the sense that the current mainline > scheduler is (supposed to be) doing something similar: if the > node is still within capacity, then there's no reason to move > those threads. > > OTOH, I think with NUMA balancing we indeed want to spread > them better, if those tasks do not share memory with each > other but use their own memory. If they share memory then they > should remain on the same node if possible. Could you please check tip:master with -v17: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git master ? It should place your workload better than v16 did. Note, you might be able to find other combinations of tasks that are not scheduled NUMA-perfectly yet, as task group placement is not exhaustive yet. You might want to check which combination looks the weirdest to you and report it, so I can fix any remaining placement inefficiencies in order of importance. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org