Re: [RFC] AutoNUMA alpha6

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> [...]
> 
> So give me a break... you must have made a real mess in your 
> benchmarking. numasched is always doing worse than upstream 
> here, in fact two times massively worse. Almost as bad as the 
> inverse binds.

Andrea, please stop attacking the messenger.

We wanted and needed more testing, and I'm glad that we got it.

Can we please figure out all the details *without* accusing 
anyone of having made a mess? It is quite possible as well that 
*you* made a mess of it somewhere, either at the conceptual 
stage or at the implementational stage, right?

numasched getting close to the hard binding numbers is pretty 
much what I'd expect to see from it: it is an 
automatic/intelligent CPU and memory affinity (and migration) 
method to approximate the results of manual hard binding of 
threads.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/