Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-05 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 03:36:38PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > I was going for the opposite conclusion: that it does not matter > whether memory is accessed privately or in a shared fashion, because > there is no obvious connection to its access frequency, not to me at > least. There is a

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-05 Thread Mel Gorman
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 03:36:38PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:23:56AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > > Ideally it would be possible

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-05 Thread Mel Gorman
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 03:36:38PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:23:56AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: Ideally it would be possible to

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-05 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 03:36:38PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: I was going for the opposite conclusion: that it does not matter whether memory is accessed privately or in a shared fashion, because there is no obvious connection to its access frequency, not to me at least. There is a

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:23:56AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > > Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults > > > that are private to a

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Rik van Riel
On 07/04/2013 05:23 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: I think that dealing with this specific problem is a series all on its own and treating it on its own in isolation would be best. Agreed, lets tackle one thing at a time, otherwise we will (once again) end up with a patch series that is too large to

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Mel Gorman
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: > On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > > Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults > > that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require > > that the last

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Mel Gorman
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require that the last task

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Rik van Riel
On 07/04/2013 05:23 AM, Mel Gorman wrote: I think that dealing with this specific problem is a series all on its own and treating it on its own in isolation would be best. Agreed, lets tackle one thing at a time, otherwise we will (once again) end up with a patch series that is too large to

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-04 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 10:23:56AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 05:56:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote: On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults that are private to a task and

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-03 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults > that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require > that the last task that accessed a page for a hinting fault would be > recorded which

[PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-03 Thread Mel Gorman
Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require that the last task that accessed a page for a hinting fault would be recorded which would increase the size of struct page. Instead this patch

[PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-03 Thread Mel Gorman
Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require that the last task that accessed a page for a hinting fault would be recorded which would increase the size of struct page. Instead this patch

Re: [PATCH 07/13] sched: Split accounting of NUMA hinting faults that pass two-stage filter

2013-07-03 Thread Johannes Weiner
On Wed, Jul 03, 2013 at 03:21:34PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: Ideally it would be possible to distinguish between NUMA hinting faults that are private to a task and those that are shared. This would require that the last task that accessed a page for a hinting fault would be recorded which would