On 2017年12月20日 23:58, Christopher Lameter wrote: > On Wed, 20 Dec 2017, kemi wrote: > >>> You are making numastats special and I yet haven't heard any sounds >>> arguments for that. But that should be discussed in the respective >>> patch. >>> >> >> That is because we have much larger threshold size for NUMA counters, that >> means larger >> deviation. So, the number in local cpus may not be simply ignored. > > Some numbers showing the effect of these changes would be helpful. You can > probably create some in kernel synthetic tests to start with which would > allow you to see any significant effects of those changes. > > Then run the larger testsuites (f.e. those that Mel has published) and > benchmarks to figure out how behavior of real apps *may* change? >
OK. I will do that when available. Let's just drop this patch in this series and consider this issue in another patch.
