Re: [PATCH 1/5] cpuset memory spread basic implementation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 

* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:

> > We normally run with different policies, in the same box, on different 
> > cpusets at the same time.  But this might be because some cpusets 
> > -need- the memory spreading, and the others that don't are left to the 
> > default policy.
> 
> so in practice, the memory spreading is in fact a global setting, used 
> by all cpusets that matter? That seems to support Andrew's observation 
> that our assumptions / defaults are bad, pretty much independently of 
> the workload.

in other words: the spreading out likely _hurts_ performance in the 
typical case (which prefers node-locality), but when you are using 
multiple cpusets you want to opt for fairness between projects, over 
opportunistic optimizations such as node-local allocations. I.e. the 
spreading out, as it is used today, is rather a global fairness setting 
for the kernel, and not really a workload-specific access-pattern thing.  
Right?

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux