Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 19, 2018, at 6:12 PM, Christopher Lameter wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Henry Willard wrote: > >> If MPOL_MF_LAZY were allowed and specified things would not work >> correctly. change_pte_range() is unaware of and can’t honor the >> difference between

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 19, 2018, at 6:12 PM, Christopher Lameter wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Henry Willard wrote: > >> If MPOL_MF_LAZY were allowed and specified things would not work >> correctly. change_pte_range() is unaware of and can’t honor the >> difference between MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL and

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Henry Willard wrote: > If MPOL_MF_LAZY were allowed and specified things would not work > correctly. change_pte_range() is unaware of and can’t honor the > difference between MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL and MPOL_MF_MOVE. Not sure how that relates to what I said earlier... Sorry. > >

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018, Henry Willard wrote: > If MPOL_MF_LAZY were allowed and specified things would not work > correctly. change_pte_range() is unaware of and can’t honor the > difference between MPOL_MF_MOVE_ALL and MPOL_MF_MOVE. Not sure how that relates to what I said earlier... Sorry. > >

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:23 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Mel Gorman wrote: > >> My main source of discomfort is the fact that this is permanent as two >> processes perfectly isolated but with a suitably shared COW mapping >> will never migrate the

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 17, 2018, at 10:23 AM, Christopher Lameter wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Mel Gorman wrote: > >> My main source of discomfort is the fact that this is permanent as two >> processes perfectly isolated but with a suitably shared COW mapping >> will never migrate the data. A potential

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Mel Gorman wrote: > My main source of discomfort is the fact that this is permanent as two > processes perfectly isolated but with a suitably shared COW mapping > will never migrate the data. A potential improvement to get the reported > bandwidth up in the test program would

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Tue, 16 Jan 2018, Mel Gorman wrote: > My main source of discomfort is the fact that this is permanent as two > processes perfectly isolated but with a suitably shared COW mapping > will never migrate the data. A potential improvement to get the reported > bandwidth up in the test program would

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 16, 2018, at 1:26 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:28:44AM -0800, Henry Willard wrote: >> Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program >> with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing >> page

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

> On Jan 16, 2018, at 1:26 PM, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:28:44AM -0800, Henry Willard wrote: >> Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program >> with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing >> page migration of the

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:28:44AM -0800, Henry Willard wrote: > Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program > with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing > page migration of the pages in the shared data section. This shows up as > high

Re: [PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:28:44AM -0800, Henry Willard wrote: > Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program > with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing > page migration of the pages in the shared data section. This shows up as > high

[PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing page migration of the pages in the shared data section. This shows up as high I/O wait time and degraded performance on machines with higher socket or

[PATCH] mm: numa: Do not trap faults on shared data section pages.

Workloads consisting of a large number processes running the same program with a large shared data section may suffer from excessive numa balancing page migration of the pages in the shared data section. This shows up as high I/O wait time and degraded performance on machines with higher socket or