From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de,
chegu_vinod@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] sched,numa: weigh nearby nodes for task placement on complex NUMA topologies
Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 11:16:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <536CF165.3080809@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140509100346.GS30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 05/09/2014 06:03 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2014 at 01:23:29PM -0400, riel@redhat.com wrote:
>> static inline unsigned long task_weight(struct task_struct *p, int nid)
>> {
>> - unsigned long total_faults;
>> + unsigned long total_faults, score;
>>
>> if (!p->numa_faults_memory)
>> return 0;
>> @@ -940,15 +997,32 @@ static inline unsigned long task_weight(struct task_struct *p, int nid)
>> if (!total_faults)
>> return 0;
>>
>> - return 1000 * task_faults(p, nid) / total_faults;
>> + score = 1000 * task_faults(p, nid);
>> + score += nearby_nodes_score(p, nid, true);
>> +
>> + score /= total_faults;
>> +
>> + return score;
>> }
>
> So you add an O(nr_nodes) loop to task_weight(), but that in itself is
> already called from O(nr_nodes) loops, yielding a total complexity of
> O(nr_nodes^2).
However, it only does actual calculations for nodes that
are closer by than the furthest away nodes in the system.
Hopefully on even the largest systems, that will mean an
"island" of a handful of nodes, with everything else being
at the same large distance.
> This might be fine, but algorithmic complexity should very much be a
> part of the changelog I think.
Agreed, I do need to document this kind of thing better,
if only because it gives people a chance to verify my
assumptions.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-09 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-08 17:23 [PATCH 0/4] sched,numa: task placement for complex NUMA topologies riel
2014-05-08 17:23 ` [PATCH 1/4] numa,x86: store maximum numa node distance riel
2014-05-09 9:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 15:08 ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-08 17:23 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched,numa: weigh nearby nodes for task placement on complex NUMA topologies riel
2014-05-09 9:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 15:14 ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-09 9:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 10:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 15:16 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2014-05-09 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 15:11 ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-09 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-09 15:03 ` Rik van Riel
2014-05-08 17:23 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched,numa: store numa_group's preferred nid riel
2014-05-08 17:23 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched,numa: pull workloads towards their preferred nodes riel
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=536CF165.3080809@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/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