public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de, mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched,numa: always try to migrate to preferred node at task_numa_placement time
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 14:23:41 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5392072D.6040605@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140606171801.GE11371@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 06/06/2014 01:18 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 04:33:15PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
>> It is possible that at task_numa_placement time, the task's
>> numa_preferred_nid does not change, but the task is not
>> actually running on the preferred node at the time.
>>
>> In that case, we still want to attempt migration to the
>> preferred node.
> 
> So we have that numa_migrate_retry which was supposed to keep kicking
> the task until it got where it needed to go.

It does, and it appears to work.

> But now you continuously kick from task_numa_placement().

No, we only kick from task_numa_placement() if the task is not
already running on its preferred nid.

> Clearly the retry thing didn't work, what happened? We got to the
> preferred nid, disabled the retry and got moved away again?
> 
> Do we want to remove the retry logic in favour of this more aggressive
> form?

I think we want both. When we have fresh statistics, and we discover
that we are not running on our preferred nid, is there any reason
not to relocate to a better node?

Moving a task to another node is cheap, and moving it sooner means
we can end up avoiding migrating memory around twice.

>> @@ -1575,11 +1575,13 @@ static void task_numa_placement(struct task_struct *p)
> 
>> +	if (max_faults) {
>> +		/* Set the new preferred node */
>> +		if (max_nid != p->numa_preferred_nid)
>> +			sched_setnuma(p, max_nid);
>> +
>> +		if (task_node(p) != p->numa_preferred_nid)
>> +			numa_migrate_preferred(p);
>>  	}
>>  
> 
> 


-- 
All rights reversed

  reply	other threads:[~2014-06-06 18:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-06-04 20:33 [PATCH] sched,numa: always try to migrate to preferred node at task_numa_placement time Rik van Riel
2014-06-06 17:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-06 18:23   ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2014-06-10 15:07     ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-19 12:36 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/numa: Always try to migrate to preferred node at task_numa_placement() time tip-bot for Rik van 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=5392072D.6040605@redhat.com \
    --to=riel@redhat.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