Re: [PATCH -V6 RESEND 1/3] numa balancing: Migrate on fault among multiple bound nodes

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 11:40:54AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 04:42:32PM +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > Now, NUMA balancing can only optimize the page placement among the
> > NUMA nodes if the default memory policy is used.  Because the memory
> > policy specified explicitly should take precedence.  But this seems
> > too strict in some situations.  For example, on a system with 4 NUMA
> > nodes, if the memory of an application is bound to the node 0 and 1,
> > NUMA balancing can potentially migrate the pages between the node 0
> > and 1 to reduce cross-node accessing without breaking the explicit
> > memory binding policy.
> > 
> 
> Ok, I think this part is ok and while the test case is somewhat
> superficial, it at least demonstrated that the NUMA balancing overhead
> did not offset any potential benefit
> 
> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>

Who do we expect to merge this, me through tip/sched/core or akpm ?