Re: [PATCH 00/27] Latest numa/core release, v16

[Ingo Molnar]

* 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 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/