From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755984Ab1LMUjJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:39:09 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:6597 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755669Ab1LMUjH (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:39:07 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,315,1320652800"; d="scan'208";a="101820855" Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 12:38:56 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Shaohua Li , lkml , linux-mm , Andrew Morton , Jens Axboe , lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, David Rientjes Subject: Re: [patch v3]numa: add a sysctl to control interleave allocation granularity from each node to improve I/O performance Message-ID: <20111213203856.GA6312@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <1323655125.22361.376.camel@sli10-conroe> <20111213190632.GA5830@tassilo.jf.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 02:12:58PM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > I would prefer to add a new policy (INTERLEAVE_MULTI or so) for this > > instead of a global sysctl, that takes the additional parameter. > > That would require a change of all scripts and code that uses > MPOL_INTERLEAVE. Lets not do that. Yes, but setting a sysctl would need the same right? It's not clear that all workloads want this. With a global switch only you cannot set it case by case. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only