lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 13/40] autonuma: CPU follow memory algorithm
From
Date
On Fri, 2012-06-29 at 14:46 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > I've also stated several times that forceful migration in the context of
> > numa balancing must go.
>
> I am not convinced about this part either way.
>
> I do not see how a migration numa thread (which could potentially
> use idle cpu time) will be any worse than migrate on fault, which
> will always take away time from the userspace process.

Any NUMA stuff is long term, it really shouldn't matter on the timescale
of a few jiffies.

NUMA placement should also not over-ride fairness, esp. not by default.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-29 21:41    [W:0.093 / U:2.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site