Re: [RFC][PATCH] mm: Remove NUMA_INTERLEAVE_HIT

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

 



On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 09:28:20AM -0600, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > The problem is that then there will be nothing left that actually
> > tests interleaving. The numactl has caught kernel regressions in the past.
> 
> How about adding a CONFIG_NUMA_DEBUG option and have it only available
> then? I think there is no general use case.

For a few lines of code? And making it harder to test?

> > I don't think disabling useful regression tests is a good idea.
> > In contrary the kernel needs far more of them, not less.
> 
> True. Some more debugging code for the NUMA features would be appreciated
> but that does not need to be enabled by default. Lately I have become a
> bit concerned about the number of statistics we are adding. The
> per_cpu_pageset structure should not get too large.

I don't think the single counter is a problem.

-Andi

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]