Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261976AbVBTWbP (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:31:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262031AbVBTWbP (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:31:15 -0500 Received: from zeus.kernel.org ([204.152.189.113]:49070 "EHLO zeus.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261976AbVBTWbK (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:31:10 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 14:30:23 -0800 From: Paul Jackson To: Andi Kleen Cc: raybry@sgi.com, ak@suse.de, ak@muc.de, raybry@austin.rr.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 2.6.11-rc2-mm2 0/7] mm: manual page migration -- overview II Message-Id: <20050220143023.3d64252b.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <20050220214922.GA14486@wotan.suse.de> References: <42114279.5070202@sgi.com> <20050215121404.GB25815@muc.de> <421241A2.8040407@sgi.com> <20050215214831.GC7345@wotan.suse.de> <4212C1A9.1050903@sgi.com> <20050217235437.GA31591@wotan.suse.de> <4215A992.80400@sgi.com> <20050218130232.GB13953@wotan.suse.de> <42168FF0.30700@sgi.com> <20050220214922.GA14486@wotan.suse.de> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1665 Lines: 34 Andi wrote: > I still think it's fundamentally unclean and racy. External processes > shouldn't mess with virtual addresses of other processes. It's not really messing with (changing) the virtual addresses of another process. It's messing with the physical placement. It's using the virtual addresses to help choose which pages to move. Do you have any better way to suggest, Andi, for a batch manager to relocate a job? The typical scenario, as Ray explained it to me, is thus. A lower priority job, after running a while, is displaced by a higher priority job that needs a large number of nodes. Later on enough nodes to run the lower priority job become available elsewhere. The lower priority job can either continue to wait for its original nodes to come free (after the high priority job finishes) or it can be relocated to the nodes available now. How would you recommend that the batch manager move that job to the nodes that can run it? The layout of allocated memory pages and tasks for that job must be preserved in order to keep the same performance. The migration method needs to scale to hundreds, or more, of nodes. (I'm starting to have visions of vma's having externally visible id's, in a per-task namespace.) -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.650.933.1373, 1.925.600.0401 - 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/