Re: [PATCH v4 04/11] sched/fair: rework load_balance

[Mel Gorman]

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 11:58:30AM +0100, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > This roughly matches what I've seen. The interesting part to me for
> > netperf is the next section of the report that reports the locality of
> > numa hints. With netperf on a 2-socket machine, it's generally around
> > 50% as the client/server are pulled apart. Because netperf is not
> > heavily memory bound, it doesn't have much impact on the overall
> > performance but it's good at catching the cross-node migrations.
> 
> Ok. I didn't want to make my reply too long. I have put them below for 
> the netperf-tcp results:
>                                         5.3-rc2        5.3-rc2
>                                             tip      +rwk+fix
> Ops NUMA alloc hit                  60077762.00    60387907.00
> Ops NUMA alloc miss                        0.00           0.00
> Ops NUMA interleave hit                    0.00           0.00
> Ops NUMA alloc local                60077571.00    60387798.00
> Ops NUMA base-page range updates        5948.00       17223.00
> Ops NUMA PTE updates                    5948.00       17223.00
> Ops NUMA PMD updates                       0.00           0.00
> Ops NUMA hint faults                    4639.00       14050.00
> Ops NUMA hint local faults %            2073.00        6515.00
> Ops NUMA hint local percent               44.69          46.37
> Ops NUMA pages migrated                 1528.00        4306.00
> Ops AutoNUMA cost                         23.27          70.45
> 

Thanks -- it was "NUMA hint local percent" I was interested in and the
46.37% local hinting faults is likely indicative of the client/server
being load balanced across SD_NUMA domains without NUMA Balancing being
aggressive enough to fix it. At least I know I am not just seriously
unlucky or testing magical machines!

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs