Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:23:16 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: More fine-grained NUMA knobs Message-ID: <20160323072315.GW1741@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <27035442.YCnG4SQ1mX@ralph.baldwin.cx> References: <27035442.YCnG4SQ1mX@ralph.baldwin.cx>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 05:13:05PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > Some of the I/O device affinity stuff such as bus_get_domain() (and the > bus_get_cpus() I have in review in D5519) are useful on their own right even > if the VM system is not doing NUMA-aware allocations. I think it would be > useful to be able to enable these two "prongs" of NUMA awareness > independently. To that end, I have a little strawman patch that adds two > new kernel options: VM_NUMA_ALLOC and DEVICE_NUMA. I actually think it is > probably worth enabling DEVICE_NUMA by default on x86 (and bumping the > default MAXMEMDOM to, say, 8 (quad-socket haswell)). > > You can see the simple patch at: > > https://github.com/bsdjhb/freebsd/compare/master...bsdjhb:numa_opts > > Thoughts? I do not like that you check both defined(xxx_NUMA) and MAXMEMDOM > 1. IMO the > 1 part should be dropped. I do not see why would it be useful even as optimization. Otherwise, this looks good.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160323072315.GW1741>