From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752889Ab1CGQdj (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:33:39 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:63736 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750925Ab1CGQdg (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:33:36 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.62,277,1297065600"; d="scan'208";a="894650717" Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 08:33:34 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: KOSAKI Motohiro Cc: Andi Kleen , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aarcange@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] Add __GFP_OTHER_NODE flag Message-ID: <20110307163334.GB13384@alboin.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <1299182391-6061-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1299182391-6061-7-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20110307173042.8A04.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110307173042.8A04.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Yes, less intrusive. But are you using current NUMA stastics on > practical system? Yes I do. I know users use it too. We unfortunately still have enough NUMA locality problems in the kernel so that overflowing nodes, causing fallbacks for process memory etc. are not uncommon. If you get that then numastat is very useful to track down what happens. In an ideal world with perfect NUMA balancing it wouldn't be needed, but we're far from that. Also the numactl test suite depends on them. -Andi