Re: [PATCH 00/19] sched-numa rewrite

2012-08-17 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
Hi, On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 02:43:34PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > While the sched-numa code is relatively small and clean, the > current version does not seem to offer a significant > performance improvement over not having it, and in one of > the tests performance actually regresses vs. mainlin

Re: [PATCH 00/19] sched-numa rewrite

2012-08-08 Thread Rik van Riel
On 08/08/2012 01:17 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: Hi everyone, On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:12:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: Hi all, After having had a talk with Rik about all this NUMA nonsense where he proposed the scheme implemented in the next to last patch, I came up with a related means

Re: [PATCH 00/19] sched-numa rewrite

2012-08-08 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
Hi everyone, On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 09:12:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi all, > > After having had a talk with Rik about all this NUMA nonsense where he > proposed > the scheme implemented in the next to last patch, I came up with a related > means of doing the home-node selection. > >

[PATCH 00/19] sched-numa rewrite

2012-07-31 Thread Peter Zijlstra
Hi all, After having had a talk with Rik about all this NUMA nonsense where he proposed the scheme implemented in the next to last patch, I came up with a related means of doing the home-node selection. I've also switched to (ab)using PROT_NONE for driving the migration faults. These patches go