From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pd0-f173.google.com (mail-pd0-f173.google.com [209.85.192.173]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA186B0038 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 11:56:51 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pd0-f173.google.com with SMTP id ft15so2760057pdb.18 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 08:56:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from e28smtp01.in.ibm.com (e28smtp01.in.ibm.com. [122.248.162.1]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dr2si38647127pdb.66.2014.11.18.08.56.49 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Nov 2014 08:56:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp01.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:26:47 +0530 Received: from d28relay02.in.ibm.com (d28relay02.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.59]) by d28dlp01.in.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF19E004C for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:27:01 +0530 (IST) Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (d28av03.in.ibm.com [9.184.220.65]) by d28relay02.in.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id sAIGuwDt38011000 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:26:58 +0530 Received: from d28av03.in.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d28av03.in.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id sAIGugPP006759 for ; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:26:42 +0530 From: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Replace _PAGE_NUMA with PAGE_NONE protections In-Reply-To: <546B74F5.10004@oracle.com> References: <1415971986-16143-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <5466C8A5.3000402@oracle.com> <20141118154246.GB2725@suse.de> <546B74F5.10004@oracle.com> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 22:26:41 +0530 Message-ID: <87tx1w78hi.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Sasha Levin , Mel Gorman Cc: Linux Kernel , Linux-MM , Hugh Dickins , Dave Jones , Rik van Riel , Ingo Molnar , Kirill Shutemov , Linus Torvalds Sasha Levin writes: > On 11/18/2014 10:42 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: >> 1. I'm assuming this is a KVM setup but can you confirm? > > Yes. > >> 2. Are you using numa=fake=N? > > Yes. numa=fake=24, which is probably way more nodes on any physical machine > than the new code was tested on? > >> 3. If you are using fake NUMA, what happens if you boot without it as >> that should make the patches a no-op? > > Nope, still seeing it without fake numa. > >> 4. Similarly, does the kernel boot properly without without patches? > > Yes, the kernel works fine without the patches both with and without fake > numa. Hmm that is interesting. I am not sure how writeback_fid can be related. We use writeback fid to enable client side caching with 9p (cache=loose). We use this fid to write back dirty pages later. Can you share the qemu command line used, 9p mount options and the test details ? -aneesh -- 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