Re: Results for balancenuma v8, autonuma-v28fast and numacore-20121126

[Rik van Riel]

On 11/30/2012 06:41 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> This is an another insanely long mail. Short summary, based on the results
> of what is in tip/master right now, I think if we're going to merge
> anything for v3.8 it should be the "Automatic NUMA Balancing V8". It does
> reasonably well for many of the workloads and AFAIK there is no reason why
> numacore or autonuma could not be rebased on top with the view to merging
> proper scheduling and placement policies in 3.9.

Given how minimalistic balancenuma is, and how there does not seem
to be anything significant in the way of performance regressions
with balancenuma, I have no objections to Linus merging all of
balancenuma for 3.8.

That could significantly reduce the amount of NUMA code we need
to "fight over" for the 3.9 kernel :)

--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/