* Srikar Dronamraju <sri...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > if (p->numa_group) {
> > if (env.best_cpu == -1)
> > @@ -1513,7 +1520,7 @@ static int task_numa_migrate(struct task_struct *p)
> > nid = env.dst_nid;
> >
> > if (node_isset(nid, p->numa_group->active_nodes))
> > - sched_setnuma(p, env.dst_nid);
> > + sched_setnuma(p, nid);
> > }
> >
> > /* No better CPU than the current one was found. */
> >
>
> Overall this patch does seem to produce better results. However numa02
> gets affected -vely.
Huh?
numa02 is the more important benchmark of the two. 'numa01' is a conflicting
workload that is a lot more sensitive to balancing details - while 'numa02' is
a
nicely partitioned workload that should converge as fast as possible.
So if numa02 got worse then it's a bad change.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
