Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] sched/numa: Introduce per cgroup numa balance control

[Chen Yu]

Hi Kaiyang,

On 2025-03-05 at 14:38:14 +0000, Kaiyang Zhao wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 09:59:33PM +0800, Chen Yu wrote:
> > This per-cgroup NUMA balancing control was once proposed in
> > 2019 by Yun Wang[1]. Then, in 2024, Kaiyang Zhao mentioned
> > that he was working with Meta on per-cgroup NUMA control[2]
> > during a discussion with David Rientjes.
> > 
> > I could not find further discussion regarding per-cgroup NUMA
> > balancing from that point on. This set of RFC patches is a
> > rough and compile-passed version, and may have unhandled cases
> > (for example, THP). It has not been thoroughly tested and is
> > intended to initiate or resume the discussion on the topic of
> > per-cgroup NUMA load balancing.
> 
> Hello Chen,
> 
> It's nice to see people interested in this. I posted a set of RFC patches
> later[1] that focuses on the fairness issue in memory tiering. It mostly
> concerns the demotion side of things, and the promotion / NUMA balancing
> side of things was left out of the patch set.
>

I see, thanks for the information.
 
> I don't work for Meta now, but my understanding is that they'll attempt
> to push through a solution for per-cgroup control of memory tiering that
> is in the same vein as my RFC patches, and it may include controls for
> per-group NUMA balancing in the context of tiered memory.
>

OK, it would be nice to see that patch set. We can continue the disscussion
on this basic per-cgroup Numa balancing control, the tiered memory promotion
could be on top of that IMO.

thanks,
Chenyu
 
> Best,
> Kaiyang
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240920221202.1734227-1-kaiyang2@xxxxxxxxxx/