Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Take the scheduling domain into account in numa balancin

[Chuyi Zhou <zhouchuyi@bytedance.com>]

在 2025/1/7 18:48, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 08:40:18PM +0800, Chuyi Zhou wrote:
>> Hello Peter,
>>
>> 在 2025/1/3 19:36, Peter Zijlstra 写道:
>>> Your $subject and actual patches do not patch.
>>>
>>> Your subject suggests you're taking the scheduling domains into account
>>> for numa balancing, your actual patches are bunch of special case hacks
>>> that totally ignore the actual sched domains
>>
>> The subject is indeed inappropriate, but the issues mentioned in this
>> patchset still exist, right?
>>
>> - We should not consider isolated CPUs in numa_stats.
>> - We should not select isolated CPUs as candidate CPUs.
>>
>> The current patch handle the above cases with hacks because I thought this
>> kind of change is minimal to fix this issue. Perhaps you have a better
>> solution for this issue? If so, please let me know, and I am more than
>> willing to continue addressing this problem.
> 
> I would much rather see you do what the subject claims :-)
> 
> At the very least you should mask the whole thing against rq->rd->span
> if there is a rq->rd at all ofcourse. This is not just the iteration in
> update_numa_stats() but also the for_each_node_state() iteration.
> 
> I'm not sure there's anything saner than:
> 
> 	cpumask_intersects(rq->rd->span, cpumask_of_node(nid))
> 

Thank you for your suggestion. It will be implemented in the next version.

Thansk.