From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx166.postini.com [74.125.245.166]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AAEB96B00CC for ; Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:09:34 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <50B8DA2D.8030604@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:09:17 -0500 From: Rik van Riel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Results for balancenuma v8, autonuma-v28fast and numacore-20121126 References: <1353612353-1576-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <20121126145800.GK8218@suse.de> <20121128134930.GB20087@suse.de> <20121130113300.GC20087@suse.de> <20121130114145.GD20087@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20121130114145.GD20087@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Mel Gorman Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Andrea Arcangeli , Ingo Molnar , Johannes Weiner , Hugh Dickins , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , Hillf Danton , Lee Schermerhorn , Alex Shi , Srikar Dronamraju , Aneesh Kumar , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Linux-MM , LKML On 11/30/2012 06:41 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: > This is an another insanely long mail. Short summary, based on the results > of what is in tip/master right now, I think if we're going to merge > anything for v3.8 it should be the "Automatic NUMA Balancing V8". It does > reasonably well for many of the workloads and AFAIK there is no reason why > numacore or autonuma could not be rebased on top with the view to merging > proper scheduling and placement policies in 3.9. Given how minimalistic balancenuma is, and how there does not seem to be anything significant in the way of performance regressions with balancenuma, I have no objections to Linus merging all of balancenuma for 3.8. That could significantly reduce the amount of NUMA code we need to "fight over" for the 3.9 kernel :) -- All rights reversed -- 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