From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>
Cc: gourry@gourry.net, hyeonggon.yoo@sk.com,
ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, honggyu.kim@sk.com,
rafael@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
rakie.kim@sk.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, dave.jiang@intel.com,
horen.chuang@linux.dev, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
linux-kernel@vger.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] mm/mempolicy: Weighted Interleave Auto-tuning
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 18:20:09 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250207182009.7fc099c3074ad00338f25e0a@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250207201335.2105488-1-joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:13:35 -0800 Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch introduces an auto-configuration mode for the interleave
> weights that aims to balance the two goals of setting node weights to be
> proportional to their bandwidths and keeping the weight values low.
> In order to perform the weight re-scaling, we use an internal
> "weightiness" value (fixed to 32) that defines interleave aggression.
Question please. How does one determine whether a particular
configuration is working well? To determine whether
manual-configuration-A is better than manual-configuration-B is better
than auto-configuration?
Leading to... how do we know that this patch makes the kernel better?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-08 2:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-07 20:13 Joshua Hahn
2025-02-08 2:20 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2025-02-08 5:06 ` Joshua Hahn
2025-02-12 0:17 ` Andrew Morton
2025-02-12 15:26 ` Joshua Hahn
2025-02-10 5:36 ` Gregory Price
2025-02-11 0:39 ` Andrew Morton
2025-02-11 2:14 ` Gregory Price
2025-02-08 6:51 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-02-12 15:18 ` Joshua Hahn
2025-02-12 2:49 ` Huang, Ying
2025-02-12 17:06 ` Joshua Hahn
2025-02-13 1:32 ` Huang, Ying
2025-02-14 15:45 ` Joshua Hahn
2025-02-16 0:40 ` Huang, Ying
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250207182009.7fc099c3074ad00338f25e0a@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=honggyu.kim@sk.com \
--cc=horen.chuang@linux.dev \
--cc=hyeonggon.yoo@sk.com \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox