Re: [PATCH 00/31] numa/core patches

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:20:32 +0000 Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> ...

Useful testing - thanks.  Did I miss the description of what
autonumabench actually does?  How representitive is it of real-world
things?

> I also expect autonuma is continually scanning where as schednuma is
> reacting to some other external event or at least less frequently scanning.

Might this imply that autonuma is consuming more CPU in kernel threads,
the cost of which didn't get included in these results?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/