From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@engr.sgi.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
akpm@osdl.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, steiner@sgi.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wu Fengguang <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>,
discuss@x86-64.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] Re: [PATCH 1/3] Zone reclaim V3: main patch
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 00:28:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051208232827.GZ11190@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0512081514510.31246@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
On Thu, Dec 08, 2005 at 03:19:36PM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > I would use > LOCAL_DISTANCE or perhaps if you really want
> > a new constant with value 12-15.
>
> One may define RECLAIM_DISTANCE to be 12 for x86_64 in topology.h
> in order to get zone reclaim earlier for the opteron clusters. I would
> think though that large opteron clusters also have distances > 20.
>
> My experience is that at 20 systems do not need zone reclaim yet.
I really cannot confirm your experience here.
>
> > > RECLAIM_DISTANCE can be set per arch if the default is not okay.
> >
> > Well if anything it would be per system - perhaps need to make
> > it a boot option or somesuch later.
>
> The idea here was to avoid any manual configuration. The numa distances
Sure as a default this makes sense.
I'm just questioning your default values.
> must related in some real way to performance (at least per arch) in order
> for the automatic determination of zone reclaim to make sense. We could
> have a boot time override but then RECLAIM_DISTANCE needs to be a
> variable not a macro.
The macro can be always later defined to a variable, no problem.
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-08 23:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-08 20:37 [PATCH 1/3] Zone reclaim V3: main patch Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 20:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] Zone reclaim V3: Remove debris from old zone reclaim Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 20:37 ` [PATCH 3/3] Zone reclaim V3: Frequency of failed reclaim attempts Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 20:52 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-08 21:08 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 21:08 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 21:10 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-08 21:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] Zone reclaim V3: main patch Andi Kleen
2005-12-08 21:23 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 22:51 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-08 23:19 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 23:28 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2005-12-08 23:35 ` [discuss] " Christoph Lameter
2005-12-08 23:40 ` Andi Kleen
2005-12-09 0:10 ` Christoph Lameter
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=20051208232827.GZ11190@wotan.suse.de \
--to=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=clameter@engr.sgi.com \
--cc=discuss@x86-64.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steiner@sgi.com \
--cc=wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
/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