Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] sched/numa: Introduce per cgroup numa balance control

[Kaiyang Zhao <kaiyang2@cs.cmu.edu>]

On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 09:59:33PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> This per-cgroup NUMA balancing control was once proposed in
> 2019 by Yun Wang[1]. Then, in 2024, Kaiyang Zhao mentioned
> that he was working with Meta on per-cgroup NUMA control[2]
> during a discussion with David Rientjes.
> 
> I could not find further discussion regarding per-cgroup NUMA
> balancing from that point on. This set of RFC patches is a
> rough and compile-passed version, and may have unhandled cases
> (for example, THP). It has not been thoroughly tested and is
> intended to initiate or resume the discussion on the topic of
> per-cgroup NUMA load balancing.

Hello Chen,

It's nice to see people interested in this. I posted a set of RFC patches
later[1] that focuses on the fairness issue in memory tiering. It mostly
concerns the demotion side of things, and the promotion / NUMA balancing
side of things was left out of the patch set.

I don't work for Meta now, but my understanding is that they'll attempt
to push through a solution for per-cgroup control of memory tiering that
is in the same vein as my RFC patches, and it may include controls for
per-group NUMA balancing in the context of tiered memory.

Best,
Kaiyang

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240920221202.1734227-1-kaiyang2@cs.cmu.edu/