From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=FROM_EXCESS_BASE64, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27CC7C76195 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 03:44:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DADA21951 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 03:44:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728087AbfGVDoy (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Jul 2019 23:44:54 -0400 Received: from out30-133.freemail.mail.aliyun.com ([115.124.30.133]:44419 "EHLO out30-133.freemail.mail.aliyun.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726106AbfGVDoy (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Jul 2019 23:44:54 -0400 X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R151e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01e04407;MF=yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=13;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0TXSDwvJ_1563767088; Received: from testdeMacBook-Pro.local(mailfrom:yun.wang@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TXSDwvJ_1563767088) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:44:49 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] numa: introduce numa cling feature From: =?UTF-8?B?546L6LSH?= To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: hannes@cmpxchg.org, mhocko@kernel.org, vdavydov.dev@gmail.com, Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mcgrof@kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, cgroups@vger.kernel.org, Mel Gorman , riel@surriel.com References: <209d247e-c1b2-3235-2722-dd7c1f896483@linux.alibaba.com> <60b59306-5e36-e587-9145-e90657daec41@linux.alibaba.com> <9a440936-1e5d-d3bb-c795-ef6f9839a021@linux.alibaba.com> <20190711142728.GF3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <82f42063-ce51-dd34-ba95-5b32ee733de7@linux.alibaba.com> <20190712075318.GM3402@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <0a5066be-ac10-5dce-c0a6-408725bc0784@linux.alibaba.com> Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 11:44:48 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0a5066be-ac10-5dce-c0a6-408725bc0784@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019/7/12 δΈ‹εˆ4:58, ηŽ‹θ΄‡ wrote: [snip] > > I see, we should not override the decision of select_idle_sibling(). > > Actually the original design we try to achieve is: > > let wake affine select the target > try find idle sibling of target > if got one > pick it > else if task cling to prev > pick prev > > That is to consider wake affine superior to numa cling. > > But after rethinking maybe this is not necessary, since numa cling is > also some kind of strong wake affine hint, actually maybe even a better > one to filter out the bad cases. > > I'll try change @target instead and give a retest then. We now leave select_idle_sibling() untouched, instead prevent numa swap with task cling to dst, and stop wake affine when curr & prev cpu are on different node and wakee cling to prev. Retesting show a even better results, benchmark like dbench also show 1%~5% improvement, not stable but always improved now :-) Regards, Michael Wang > > Regards, > Michael Wang >