Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 8 Jul 2015 15:56:45 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched/numa: Restore sched feature NUMA to its earlier avatar. |
| |
* Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> In commit:8a9e62a "sched/numa: Prefer NUMA hotness over cache hotness" > sched feature NUMA was always set to true. However this sched feature was > suppose to be enabled on NUMA boxes only thro set_numabalancing_state(). > > To get back to the above behaviour, bring back NUMA_FAVOUR_HIGHER feature.
Three typos and a non-standard commit ID reference.
> /* > + * NUMA_FAVOUR_HIGHER will favor moving tasks towards nodes where a > + * higher number of hinting faults are recorded during active load > + * balancing. It will resist moving tasks towards nodes where a lower > + * number of hinting faults have been recorded. > */ > -SCHED_FEAT(NUMA, true) > +SCHED_FEAT(NUMA_FAVOUR_HIGHER, true) > #endif >
So the comment spells 'favor' American, the constant you introduce is British spelling via 'FAVOUR'? Please use it consistently!
Also, this name is totally non-intuitive.
Make it something like NUMA_FAVOR_BUSY_NODES or so?
Also, I'm wondering how this can schedule in a stable fashion: if a non-busy node is not favored, how can we end up there to start building up hinting faults?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |