From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx204.postini.com [74.125.245.204]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4ABA66B0032 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:13:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from /spool/local by e39.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 04:13:25 -0600 Received: from d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (d01relay01.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.233]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DC1E6E8039 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:13:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (d01av03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.217]) by d01relay01.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r5SACpTY314110 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 06:12:51 -0400 Received: from d01av03.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av03.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r5SACnmr004659 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2013 07:12:51 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:42:45 +0530 From: Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter Message-ID: <20130628101245.GD8362@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Srikar Dronamraju References: <1372257487-9749-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <1372257487-9749-8-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20130628070027.GD17195@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20130628093625.GF29209@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130628093625.GF29209@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Mel Gorman , Ingo Molnar , Andrea Arcangeli , Johannes Weiner , Linux-MM , LKML > > > > > Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults > > > that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require > > > that the last task that accessed a page for a hinting fault would be > > > recorded which would increase the size of struct page. Instead this patch > > > approximates private pages by assuming that faults that pass the two-stage > > > filter are private pages and all others are shared. The preferred NUMA > > > node is then selected based on where the maximum number of approximately > > > private faults were measured. > > > > Should we consider only private faults for preferred node? > > I don't think so; its optimal for the task to be nearest most of its pages; > irrespective of whether they be private or shared. Then the preferred node should have been chosen based on both the private and shared faults and not just private faults. > > > I would think if tasks have shared pages then moving all tasks that share > > the same pages to a node where the share pages are around would be > > preferred. No? > > Well no; not if there's only 5 shared pages but 1024 private pages. Yes, agree, but should we try to give the shared pages some additional weightage? -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju -- 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