Re: [PATCH 2/8] sched: Track NUMA hinting faults on per-node basis

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 11:38:29AM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> * Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> [2013-06-26 15:38:01]:
> > @@ -826,6 +833,9 @@ void task_numa_fault(int node, int pages, bool migrated)
> >  			p->numa_scan_period + jiffies_to_msecs(10));
> >  
> >  	task_numa_placement(p);
> > +
> > +	/* Record the fault, double the weight if pages were migrated */
> > +	p->numa_faults[node] += pages << migrated;
> 
> 
> Why are we doing this after the placement.
> I mean we should probably be doing this in the task_numa_placement,

The placement only does something when we've completed a full scan; this
would then be the first fault of the next scan. Hence we do placement
first so as not to add this first fault of the next scan to
->numa_faults[].

This all gets changed later on when ->numa_faults_curr[] gets
introduced.
--
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/