From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UGX9X-00072M-6V for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:06:43 +0000 Received: from mx3-phx2.redhat.com ([209.132.183.24]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1UGX9W-0006PJ-1c for ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 16:06:43 +0000 Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 12:06:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Jan Stancek Message-ID: <1896214884.19403599.1363363596369.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <302258505.8905505.1363362089669.JavaMail.root@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/5] mm/oom0[3|4]: added 'OOM for CPUSET' and updated 'OOM with MEMCG & numa' List-Id: Linux Test Project General Discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ltp-list-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Zhouping Liu Cc: LTP List ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Zhouping Liu" > To: "Jan Stancek" > Cc: "LTP List" > Sent: Friday, 15 March, 2013 4:41:29 PM > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/5] mm/oom0[3|4]: added 'OOM for CPUSET' and updated 'OOM with MEMCG & numa' > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Jan Stancek" > > To: "Zhouping Liu" > > Cc: "LTP List" > > Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 5:11:57 PM > > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/5] mm/oom0[3|4]: added 'OOM for CPUSET' > > and updated 'OOM with MEMCG & numa' > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Zhouping Liu" > > > To: "Jan Stancek" > > > Cc: chrubis@suse.cz, "LTP List" > > > Sent: Friday, 15 March, 2013 3:52:26 AM > > > Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH 3/5] mm/oom0[3|4]: added 'OOM for > > > CPUSET' > > > and updated 'OOM with MEMCG & numa' > > > > > > We could add a simple function to numa_helper, but I'm not sure > > > > what > > > > it would return as default, some tests care about nodes with > > > > memory. > > > > > > yes, what you care about is right, but now we only need a > > > function, > > > which > > > can tell us the system have more than one node, we don't care > > > about > > > the > > > nodes have > > > CPUs or memory. > > > > What I was wondering is why that comment said "rough estimate", > > because in the old version, I just used the max node id to judge a > NUMA system, > which maybe is not strict. > > > it looks quite accurate. Anyway, thanks for clarifying. > > in the V2 version, I removed the ISNUMA variable, and added a new > function is_numa(), > inside the function, the system, which has 1 more than numa node, and > each node at > least contains memory, is regarded as a numa system. I think it's > more reasoned, > because NUMA is mainly about memory, more case will fail if the node > has no memory. > do you agree? I agree. Some failures on unbalanced NUMA systems led to introducing that check. I was looking at our system pool and number of such systems is very low, so I don't think we are loosing very much by requiring 2+ nodes with memory. > > -- > Thanks, > Zhouping > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_mar _______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list