On 2019/4/23 下午5:05, Peter Zijlstra wrote: [snip] >> >> TODO: >> * improve the logical to address the regression cases >> * Find a way, maybe, to handle the page cache left on remote >> * find more scenery which could gain benefit >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <yun.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/numa/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/numa/numa_balancer.c | 715 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > So I really think this is the wrong direction. Why introduce yet another > balancer thingy and not extend the existing numa balancer with the > additional information you got from the previous patches? > > Also, this really should not be a module and not in drivers The reason why we present the idea in the way of a module is that it's not suitable for all the situations, a module could be clean and easier for deploy on demands. Besides, we assume someone may prefer to have their own logical on how to do the numa balancer, thus the module give them the way to DIY easily. But there are no insist on the style, once the logical is mature enough, we can merge the idea into CFS, per-cgroup switch could be enough :-P Regards, Michael Wang >
