From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail203.messagelabs.com (mail203.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.243]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 503D96B00D0 for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:00:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (smtp.ultrahosting.com [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ultrahosting.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF1BD82C37C for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:00:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtp.ultrahosting.com ([74.213.174.254]) by localhost (smtp.ultrahosting.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OYci3El2SQcY for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:00:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from V090114053VZO-1 (unknown [74.213.171.31]) by smtp.ultrahosting.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BA8E82C37E for ; Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:59:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:56:16 -0500 (EST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 6/6] numa: slab: use numa_mem_id() for slab local memory node In-Reply-To: <20091113211823.15074.1305.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: References: <20091113211714.15074.29078.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20091113211823.15074.1305.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Lee Schermerhorn Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, Mel Gorman , Christoph Lameter , Nick Piggin , David Rientjes , eric.whitney@hp.com, Pekka Enberg List-ID: On Fri, 13 Nov 2009, Lee Schermerhorn wrote: > N.B.: incomplete. slab will need to handle node and memory hotplug > that could change the value returned by numa_mem_id() for any given > node. This will be addressed by a subsequent patch, if we decide to > go this route. It needs to be verified that this actually works. Locking is highly depending on numa locality in slab. Can you run this under load with lockdep? See also the lockdep issue that Pekka is dealing with right now. > > 2.6.32-rc5+mmotm-091101 no-patch this-patch > no memoryless nodes [avg of 10]: 12.700 12.856 ~1.2% > cpus all on memless nodes [20]: 261.530 27.700 ~10x speedup This is due to memoryless nodes being able to use per cpu queues in slab now. So far memoryless nodes always use fallback_alloc(). -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org