From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: ppc: RECLAIM_DISTANCE 10?
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:16:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140219081644.GA14783@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1402181424490.20772@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
On Tue 18-02-14 14:27:11, David Rientjes wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2014, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > I have just noticed that ppc has RECLAIM_DISTANCE reduced to 10 set by
> > 56608209d34b (powerpc/numa: Set a smaller value for RECLAIM_DISTANCE to
> > enable zone reclaim). The commit message suggests that the zone reclaim
> > is desirable for all NUMA configurations.
> >
> > History has shown that the zone reclaim is more often harmful than
> > helpful and leads to performance problems. The default RECLAIM_DISTANCE
> > for generic case has been increased from 20 to 30 around 3.0
> > (32e45ff43eaf mm: increase RECLAIM_DISTANCE to 30).
> >
> > I strongly suspect that the patch is incorrect and it should be
> > reverted. Before I will send a revert I would like to understand what
> > led to the patch in the first place. I do not see why would PPC use only
> > LOCAL_DISTANCE and REMOTE_DISTANCE distances and in fact machines I have
> > seen use different values.
> >
>
> I strongly suspect that the patch is correct since powerpc node distances
> are different than the architectures you're talking about and get doubled
> for every NUMA domain that the hardware supports.
Even if the units of the distance is different on PPC should every NUMA
machine have zone_reclaim enabled? That doesn't right to me.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-19 8:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-18 9:06 ppc: RECLAIM_DISTANCE 10? Michal Hocko
2014-02-18 22:27 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 8:16 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2014-02-19 8:20 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 9:19 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-19 21:45 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-18 23:34 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-18 23:58 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-19 0:40 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-19 1:43 ` David Rientjes
2014-02-19 8:33 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-19 16:24 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-19 16:33 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2014-02-20 9:55 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-19 8:23 ` Michal Hocko
2014-02-19 16:26 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140219081644.GA14783@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).