Subject: Re: numa/core regressions fixed - more testers wanted
From: Andrew Theurer <habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reply-To: habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
        Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1211201947510.985@eggly.anvils>
References: <1353291284-2998-1-git-send-email-mingo@kernel.org>
	 <20121119162909.GL8218@suse.de> <20121119191339.GA11701@gmail.com>
	 <20121119211804.GM8218@suse.de> <20121119223604.GA13470@gmail.com>
	 <CA+55aFzQYH4qW_Cw3aHPT0bxsiC_Q_ggy4YtfvapiMG7bR=FsA@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20121120071704.GA14199@gmail.com> <20121120152933.GA17996@gmail.com>
	 <20121120175647.GA23532@gmail.com>
	 <1353462853.31820.93.camel@oc6622382223.ibm.com>
	 <50AC4912.7040503@redhat.com>
	 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1211201947510.985@eggly.anvils>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Organization: IBM
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 11:59:16 -0600
Message-ID: <1353520756.31820.99.camel@oc6622382223.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1462
Lines: 33

On Tue, 2012-11-20 at 20:10 -0800, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Nov 2012, Rik van Riel wrote:
> > On 11/20/2012 08:54 PM, Andrew Theurer wrote:
> > 
> > > I can confirm single JVM JBB is working well for me.  I see a 30%
> > > improvement over autoNUMA.  What I can't make sense of is some perf
> > > stats (taken at 80 warehouses on 4 x WST-EX, 512GB memory):
> > 
> > AutoNUMA does not have native THP migration, that may explain some
> > of the difference.
> 
> When I made some fixes to the sched/numa native THP migration,
> I did also try porting that (with Hannes's memcg fixes) to AutoNUMA.
> 
> Here's the patch below: it appeared to be working just fine, but
> you might find that it doesn't quite apply to whatever tree you're
> using.  I started from 3.6 autonuma28fast in aa.git, but had folded
> in some of the equally applicable TLB flush optimizations too.
> 
> There's also a little "Hack, remove after THP native migration"
> retuning in mm/huge_memory.c which should probably be removed too.

Thanks, this worked for me.  The autoNUMA SPECjbb result is now much
closer, just 4% lower than the numa/core result.  The number of anon and
anon-huge pages are now nearly the same.

-Andrew Theurer

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/