From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched/numa: Apply imbalance limitations consistently
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 15:59:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YoT7xtVc0f3DVCKL@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220518104652.GO3441@techsingularity.net>
On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 11:46:52AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > (Although I do wonder about that 25% figure in the comment; that doesn't
> > seem to relate to any actual code anymore)
> >
>
> You're right, by the end of the series it's completely inaccurate and
> currently it's not accurate if there are multiple LLCs per node. I
> adjusted the wording to "Allow a NUMA imbalance if busy CPUs is less
> than the maximum threshold. Above this threshold, individual tasks may
> be contending for both memory bandwidth and any shared HT resources."
>
Looks good. Meanwhile I saw a 0-day complaint that this regresses
something something unixbench by a bit. Do we care enough? I suppose
this is one of those trade-off patches again, win some, loose some.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-18 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-11 14:30 [PATCH 0/4] Mitigate inconsistent NUMA imbalance behaviour Mel Gorman
2022-05-11 14:30 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched/numa: Initialise numa_migrate_retry Mel Gorman
2022-05-11 14:30 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched/numa: Do not swap tasks between nodes when spare capacity is available Mel Gorman
2022-05-11 14:30 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/numa: Apply imbalance limitations consistently Mel Gorman
2022-05-18 9:24 ` [sched/numa] bb2dee337b: unixbench.score -11.2% regression kernel test robot
2022-05-18 15:22 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-19 7:54 ` ying.huang
2022-05-20 6:44 ` [LKP] " Ying Huang
2022-05-18 9:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/numa: Apply imbalance limitations consistently Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-18 10:46 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-18 13:59 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2022-05-18 15:39 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-11 14:30 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched/numa: Adjust imb_numa_nr to a better approximation of memory channels Mel Gorman
2022-05-18 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-18 11:15 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-18 14:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-05-18 17:06 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-19 9:29 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-20 4:58 ` [PATCH 0/4] Mitigate inconsistent NUMA imbalance behaviour K Prateek Nayak
2022-05-20 10:18 ` Mel Gorman
2022-05-20 15:17 ` K Prateek Nayak
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-05-20 10:35 [PATCH v2 " Mel Gorman
2022-05-20 10:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched/numa: Apply imbalance limitations consistently Mel Gorman
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=YoT7xtVc0f3DVCKL@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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