From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933536AbZFQMF3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:05:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933378AbZFQMFI (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:05:08 -0400 Received: from g5t0008.atlanta.hp.com ([15.192.0.45]:6291 "EHLO g5t0008.atlanta.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757470AbZFQMFG (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:05:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4]: affinity-on-next-touch From: Lee Schermerhorn To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki Cc: Stefan Lankes , "'Andi Kleen'" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-numa@vger.kernel.org, Boris Bierbaum , "'Brice Goglin'" In-Reply-To: <20090617102245.2aec2e6e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <000c01c9d212$4c244720$e46cd560$@rwth-aachen.de> <87zldjn597.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <000001c9eac4$cb8b6690$62a233b0$@rwth-aachen.de> <20090612103251.GJ25568@one.firstfloor.org> <004001c9eb53$71991300$54cb3900$@rwth-aachen.de> <1245119977.6724.40.camel@lts-notebook> <003001c9ee8a$97e5b100$c7b11300$@rwth-aachen.de> <1245164395.15138.40.camel@lts-notebook> <20090617102245.2aec2e6e.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: HP/LKTT Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 08:02:28 -0400 Message-Id: <1245240148.31940.6.camel@lts-notebook> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 10:22 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:59:55 -0400 > Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > > > On Tue, 2009-06-16 at 15:58 +0200, Stefan Lankes wrote: > > > > > > > > I would like to get these patches working with latest mmotm to test on > > > > some newer hardware where I think they will help more. And I would > > > > welcome your support. However, I think we'll need to get Balbir and > > > > Kamezawa-san involved to sort out the interaction with memory control > > > > group. > > > > > > > > I can send you the more recent rebase that I've done. This is getting > > > > pretty old now: 2.6.28-rc4-mmotm-081110-081117. I'll try to rebase to > > > > the most recent mmotm [that boots on my platforms], at least so that we > > > > can build and boot with migrate-on-fault disabled, within the next > > > > couple of weeks. > > > > > > > > > > Sounds good! Send me your last version and I will try to reconstruct your > > > problems. Afterwards, we could try to solve these problems. > > > > > > > Stefan: > > > > I've placed the last rebased version in : > > > > http://free.linux.hp.com/~lts/Patches/PageMigration/2.6.28-rc4-mmotm-081110/ > > > > As I recall, this version DOES bug out because of reference count > > problems due to interaction with the memory controller. > > > please report in precise if memcg has bug. > An example of test is welcome. Not an memcg bug. Just an implementation choice [2 phase migration handling: start/end calls] that is problematic for "lazy" page migration--i.e., "migration-on-touch" in the fault path. I'd be interested in your opinion on the feasibility of transferring the "charge" against the page--including the "try charge" from do_swap_page()--in migrate_page_copy() along with other page state. I'll try to rebase my lazy migration series to recent mmotm [as time permits] in the "near future" and gather more info on the problem I was having. Regards, Lee