From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 20 22:43:29 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D626BC1F for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 22:43:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from waksmundzki@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ia0-x232.google.com (mail-ia0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c02::232]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB221147 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 22:43:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ia0-f178.google.com with SMTP id j38so1047227iad.23 for ; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:43:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:subject :message-id:date:to:mime-version:x-mailer; bh=eSggNpUvnti+ixyfyVNaFofj2jqpWBBqwhEy4rO3fv0=; b=f2FfUUIlfbE41ZIRfShmHLRnq7GTKd65x8Tc/gKO2WmkFuBS/4w9TF+hDid26bKVWF hOo2QluAvnbOy15j2/7kZm8E/aa4dmXZSMF19pKUeeZsknYvsu2/bHujU3oaP7q6LcSs 3JbuxGvANjQzxxetyKe7ZMQNDdW6gRJfyzGQlJ6GmBIfmT5dcDEUoeAXmEABJv7lZ9Dk vEv2P9KFMYr7iFxWiR4W12wjgf3IZcKKiBLRf0/wcSV/Doq6KpKlk8Hv8Eazpfyr2yQC PBdqEV/f0326osO5Gw3ktO6E4bdLBU0U9GvAft7sd+FjuGbFJSNdNuBLkd/dJzMmEMCX q3nA== X-Received: by 10.50.118.7 with SMTP id ki7mr10013947igb.35.1366497808956; Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:43:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.107] (c-98-253-129-150.hsd1.il.comcast.net. [98.253.129.150]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id xc3sm9082580igb.10.2013.04.20.15.43.26 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:43:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Waksmundzki Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: NUMA, cpuset and malloc Message-Id: Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 17:43:26 -0500 To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.3 \(1503\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1503) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 22:43:29 -0000 On NUMA systems allocated memory is striped across local and non-local = banks in order to have consistent performance in case the task is = rescheduled to a different CPU socket. When a process is pinned to a single CPU socket with cpuset having the = memory allocator prefer local banks would probably improve performance. = Default system behavior would stay the same and the optimization would = only be triggered on big multi socket systems when administrator used = cpuset (command mostly used for performance optimization anyway). Is this something currently implemented in FreeBSD? Is this even a good = idea?=