* Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Ok. > > In response to one of your later questions, I found that I had > in fact disabled THP without properly reporting it. [...] Hugepages is a must for most forms of NUMA/HPC. This alone questions the relevance of most of your prior numa/core testing results. I now have to strongly dispute your other conclusions as well. Just a look at 'perf top' output should have told you the story. Yet time and time again you readily reported bad 'schednuma' results for a slow 4K memory model that neither we nor other NUMA testers I talked to actually used, without stopping to look why that was so... [ I suspect that if such terabytes-of-data workloads are forced through such a slow 4K pages model then there's a bug or mis-tuning in our code that explains the level of additional slowdown you saw - we'll fix that. But you should know that behavior under the slow 4K model tells very little about the true scheduling and placement quality of the patches... ] Please report proper THP-enabled numbers before continuing. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>