On Fri, 2009-06-12 at 12:32 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 08:45:29PM +0200, Stefan Lankes wrote: > > > Your patches seem to have a lot of overlap with > > > Lee Schermerhorn's old migrate memory on cpu migration patches. > > > I don't know the status of those. > > > > I analyze Lee Schermerhorn's migrate memory on cpu migration patches > > (http://free.linux.hp.com/~lts/Patches/PageMigration/). I think that Lee > > Schermerhorn add similar functionalities to the kernel. He called the > > "affinity-on-next-touch" functionality "migrate_on_fault" and uses in his > > patches the normal NUMA memory policies. Therefore, his solution fits better > > to the Linux kernel. I tested his patches with our test applications and got > > nearly the same performance results. > > That's great to know. > > I didn't think he had a per process setting though, did he? Hi, Andi. My patches don't have per process enablement. Rather, I chose to use per cpuset enablement. I view cpusets as sort of "numa control groups" and thought this was an appropriate level at which to control this sort of behavior--analogous to memory_spread_{page|slab}. That probably needs to be discussed more widely, tho'. > > > I found only patches for the kernel 2.6.25-rc2-mm1. Does someone develop > > these patches further? > > Not to much knowledge. Maybe Lee will pick them up again now that there > are more use cases. > > If he doesn't have time maybe you could update them? As I mentioned earlier, I need to sort out the interaction with the memory controller. It was changing too fast for me to keep up in the time I could devote to it. Lee -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-numa" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
