* Alex Shi <lkml.alex@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Those of you who would like to test all the latest patches are > > welcome to pick up latest bits at tip:master: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git master > > > > I am wondering if it is a problem, but it still exists on HEAD: c418de93e39891 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mm/90131/match=compiled+with+name+pl+and+start+it+on+my > > like when just start 4 pl tasks, often 3 were running on node > 0, and 1 was running on node 1. The old balance will average > assign tasks to different node, different core. This is "normal" in the sense that the current mainline scheduler is (supposed to be) doing something similar: if the node is still within capacity, then there's no reason to move those threads. OTOH, I think with NUMA balancing we indeed want to spread them better, if those tasks do not share memory with each other but use their own memory. If they share memory then they should remain on the same node if possible. 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>