From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net>
Cc: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>,
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: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 16:39:41 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250210163941.15da1e935ed47aacf810fdd0@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z6mQUIAOTvHj3wSp@gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F>
On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 00:36:16 -0500 Gregory Price <gourry@gourry.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 06:20:09PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:13:35 -0800 Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Leading to... how do we know that this patch makes the kernel better?
>
> Just focusing on this question:
>
> The default behavior of weighted interleave without this patch is
> equivalent to normal interleave. This provides a differentiation
> out-of-the box, and that's just a better experience.
>
> We may find the default values / calculations need tweaking in the
> future, but this gives us a good starting point. Anecdotally, I've
> seen an "optimal" distribution of 10:1 based on the numbers run
> sub-optimally compared to 7:1 or 13:1 (but better than default mempol).
How was this optimality measured/observed?
> So there will always be a "try it and see" component to this.
>
> (Not to mention hardware/firmware lies regularly, and their reported
> performance numbers rarely if ever match their tested numbers - so
> *at best* this can be considered a best-effort feature)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-11 0:39 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
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 [this message]
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=20250210163941.15da1e935ed47aacf810fdd0@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