From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757227Ab3LWK0n (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Dec 2013 05:26:43 -0500 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53232 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756670Ab3LWK0l (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Dec 2013 05:26:41 -0500 Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:26:37 +0000 From: Mel Gorman To: Zlatko Calusic Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Dave Hansen , Rik van Riel , Linux-MM , LKML Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Configurable fair allocation zone policy v2r6 Message-ID: <20131223102637.GF11295@suse.de> References: <1386943807-29601-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <52B068B7.4070304@bitsync.net> <20131217212327.GL11295@suse.de> <52B5BBDF.9010200@bitsync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52B5BBDF.9010200@bitsync.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 05:03:43PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > On 17.12.2013 22:23, Mel Gorman wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:07:35PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > >>On 13.12.2013 15:10, Mel Gorman wrote: > >>>Kicked this another bit today. It's still a bit half-baked but it restores > >>>the historical performance and leaves the door open at the end for playing > >>>nice with distributing file pages between nodes. Finishing this series > >>>depends on whether we are going to make the remote node behaviour of the > >>>fair zone allocation policy configurable or redefine MPOL_LOCAL. I'm in > >>>favour of the configurable option because the default can be redefined and > >>>tested while giving users a "compat" mode if we discover the new default > >>>behaviour sucks for some workload. > >>> > >> > >>I'll start a 5-day test of this patchset in a few hours, unless you > >>can send an updated one in the meantime. I intend to test it on a > >>rather boring 4GB x86_64 machine that before Johannes' work had lots > >>of trouble balancing zones. Would you recommend to use the default > >>settings, i.e. don't mess with tunables at this point? > >> > > > >For me at least I would prefer you tested v3 of the series with the > >default settings of not interleaving file-backed pages on remote nodes > >by default. Johannes might request testing with that knob enabled if the > >machine is NUMA although I doubt it is with 4G of RAM. > > > > Tested v3 on UMA machine, with default setting. I see no regression, > no issues whatsoever. From what I understand, this whole series is > about fixing issues noticed on NUMA, so I wish you good luck with > that (no such hardware here). Just be extra careful not to disturb > finally very well balanced MM on more common machines (and > especially those equipped with 4GB RAM). And once again thank you > Johannes for your work, you did a great job. > > Tested-by: Zlatko Calusic Thanks for testing. Even though this patch is about NUMA, it preserves the fair zone allocation policy on UMA that your workload depends upon. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com (mail-ee0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E956B0036 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 05:26:41 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id c13so2254207eek.30 for ; Mon, 23 Dec 2013 02:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.suse.de (cantor2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j47si19342651eeo.116.2013.12.23.02.26.40 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 23 Dec 2013 02:26:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:26:37 +0000 From: Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] Configurable fair allocation zone policy v2r6 Message-ID: <20131223102637.GF11295@suse.de> References: <1386943807-29601-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de> <52B068B7.4070304@bitsync.net> <20131217212327.GL11295@suse.de> <52B5BBDF.9010200@bitsync.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <52B5BBDF.9010200@bitsync.net> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Zlatko Calusic Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Dave Hansen , Rik van Riel , Linux-MM , LKML On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 05:03:43PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > On 17.12.2013 22:23, Mel Gorman wrote: > >On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 04:07:35PM +0100, Zlatko Calusic wrote: > >>On 13.12.2013 15:10, Mel Gorman wrote: > >>>Kicked this another bit today. It's still a bit half-baked but it restores > >>>the historical performance and leaves the door open at the end for playing > >>>nice with distributing file pages between nodes. Finishing this series > >>>depends on whether we are going to make the remote node behaviour of the > >>>fair zone allocation policy configurable or redefine MPOL_LOCAL. I'm in > >>>favour of the configurable option because the default can be redefined and > >>>tested while giving users a "compat" mode if we discover the new default > >>>behaviour sucks for some workload. > >>> > >> > >>I'll start a 5-day test of this patchset in a few hours, unless you > >>can send an updated one in the meantime. I intend to test it on a > >>rather boring 4GB x86_64 machine that before Johannes' work had lots > >>of trouble balancing zones. Would you recommend to use the default > >>settings, i.e. don't mess with tunables at this point? > >> > > > >For me at least I would prefer you tested v3 of the series with the > >default settings of not interleaving file-backed pages on remote nodes > >by default. Johannes might request testing with that knob enabled if the > >machine is NUMA although I doubt it is with 4G of RAM. > > > > Tested v3 on UMA machine, with default setting. I see no regression, > no issues whatsoever. From what I understand, this whole series is > about fixing issues noticed on NUMA, so I wish you good luck with > that (no such hardware here). Just be extra careful not to disturb > finally very well balanced MM on more common machines (and > especially those equipped with 4GB RAM). And once again thank you > Johannes for your work, you did a great job. > > Tested-by: Zlatko Calusic Thanks for testing. Even though this patch is about NUMA, it preserves the fair zone allocation policy on UMA that your workload depends upon. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org