From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,FSL_HELO_FAKE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81F9EC4646A for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 09:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243102088F for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 09:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="RpSkkcR8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 243102088F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727007AbeILPBf (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Sep 2018 11:01:35 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:52590 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726082AbeILPBe (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Sep 2018 11:01:34 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f67.google.com with SMTP id y139-v6so1671039wmc.2 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 02:57:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/w+RZ6oitCiPc722zWO6Di1OkqxrJozKz5a6QgXVw8s=; b=RpSkkcR8VDT9cpdAQwgdxHEInJGL87M3ihex2Rj5YfOoCAoYmgasyt0kkNWz8nWUIh r04bqvynegKVrcY9hP6oYhxVCxMMVS02F8ZTL8QBdVu1CZFVINEVtegXWxzbKsHFxXnY j/3wfCe0RIa4etNVOXXdze5OVeEAIgAGhfN3c2mrlh/3xXLigF2U9I4xj6we7XO9i0ZA CC0Tk82l8E0SdVR5q61Noat0OlMSYWbQOuIkAxXyZZUy+lO4TTpw9xywzLs5e2tXsae4 rIOjA7tMC8q0ec1mCkMvt4y30aAfodlIuiY+KqZLrH4FhdGGrEHn0MXSm+eXy9+c8Xba a2sA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=/w+RZ6oitCiPc722zWO6Di1OkqxrJozKz5a6QgXVw8s=; b=iuemU0P/FkJaBbuurINFylH02ecP9OZBUGxnl0qvuIqUhu/eIUXTcZm7ogP2sm5duZ w4Z8z1VgH1lN2+1nrN2ZhlY0suHdMtdMIWMsw8oG/nwUMTN3gWOVEKnf4kSkZIeav6BD m0E2NqCF89oLdybq+XlH+pqTFvP6l1Bw8uvdFWCLc02V/k0B2Bp50fa0sCCYaahfMTfC qiVwaonpHUQl4HNWbQZ3GVeWSkTs6yLrgrkG629VM8CwAlphfPFVss1G+LGc6holQmXs Cg/3/Ua9jbUpi3LCr6+XMhjO0sooKz0XS1zkR8DOJ5GsAxpOijvr25bgrfXIRyRvL8KC QriA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51C1TjPgF2jxDi4NT25Mx+lqMJ+YggrPaq3PdmNGzEvCREOBceiI SgEy+P4/8FrMeOa2TpPWwEAo+nWI X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbMZldqRTyUfJ3loSGOTgMGxFFGUBm0eZvpGyhv+5AsJHKoVcfu+IqYXWuNrPIqZh4LUANR7A== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:32c4:: with SMTP id y187-v6mr1053055wmy.31.1536746265522; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 02:57:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (2E8B0CD5.catv.pool.telekom.hu. [46.139.12.213]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x24-v6sm1149643wrd.13.2018.09.12.02.57.44 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Wed, 12 Sep 2018 02:57:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2018 11:57:42 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Srikar Dronamraju Cc: Mel Gorman , Peter Zijlstra , Rik van Riel , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched/numa: Do not move imbalanced load purely on the basis of an idle CPU Message-ID: <20180912095742.GA3333@gmail.com> References: <20180907101139.20760-1-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <20180907101139.20760-5-mgorman@techsingularity.net> <20180907113309.GU24106@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20180907123739.GE1719@techsingularity.net> <20180910094147.GH1719@techsingularity.net> <20180912065410.GA5352@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180912065410.GA5352@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > * Mel Gorman [2018-09-10 10:41:47]: > > > On Fri, Sep 07, 2018 at 01:37:39PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > Srikar's patch here: > > > > > > > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1533276841-16341-4-git-send-email-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com > > > > > > > > Also frobs this condition, but in a less radical way. Does that yield > > > > similar results? > > > > > > I can check. I do wonder of course if the less radical approach just means > > > that automatic NUMA balancing and the load balancer simply disagree about > > > placement at a different time. It'll take a few days to have an answer as > > > the battery of workloads to check this take ages. > > > > > > > Tests completed over the weekend and I've found that the performance of > > both patches are very similar for two machines (both 2 socket) running a > > variety of workloads. Hence, I'm not worried about which patch gets picked > > up. However, I would prefer my own on the grounds that the additional > > complexity does not appear to get us anything. Of course, that changes if > > Srikar's tests on his larger ppc64 machines show the more complex approach > > is justified. > > > > Running SPECJbb2005. Higher bops are better. > > Kernel A = 4.18+ 13 sched patches part of v4.19-rc1. > Kernel B = Kernel A + 6 patches (http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1533276841-16341-1-git-send-email-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com) > Kernel C = Kernel B - (Avoid task migration for small numa improvement) i.e > http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1533276841-16341-4-git-send-email-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com > + 2 patches from Mel > (Do not move imbalanced load purely) > http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180907101139.20760-5-mgorman@techsingularity.net > (Stop comparing tasks for NUMA placement) > http://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20180907101139.20760-4-mgorman@techsingularity.net We absolutely need the 'best' pre-regression baseline kernel measurements as well - was it vanilla v4.17? Thanks, Ingo