On NUMA_BACKPLANE and NUMA_GLUELESS_MESH systems, tasks/memory should be
consolidated to the closest group of nodes. In such a case, relying on
group_fault metric may not always help to consolidate. There can always
be a case where a node closer to the preferred node may have lesser
faults than a node further away from the preferred node. In such a case,
moving to node with more faults might avoid numa consolidation.

Using group_weight would help to consolidate task/memory around the
preferred_node.

While here, to be on the conservative side, don't override migrate thread
degrades locality logic for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE load balancing.

Note: Similar problems exist with should_numa_migrate_memory and will be
dealt separately.

Running SPECjbb2005 on a 4 node machine and comparing bops/JVM
JVMS  LAST_PATCH  WITH_PATCH  %CHANGE
16    25645.4     25960       1.22
1     72142       73550       1.95

Running SPECjbb2005 on a 16 node machine and comparing bops/JVM
JVMS  LAST_PATCH  WITH_PATCH  %CHANGE
8     110199      120071      8.958
1     176303      176249      -0.03

(numbers from v1 based on v4.17-rc5)
Testcase       Time:         Min         Max         Avg      StdDev
numa01.sh      Real:      490.04      774.86      596.26       96.46
numa01.sh       Sys:      151.52      242.88      184.82       31.71
numa01.sh      User:    41418.41    60844.59    48776.09     6564.27
numa02.sh      Real:       60.14       62.94       60.98        1.00
numa02.sh       Sys:       16.11       30.77       21.20        5.28
numa02.sh      User:     5184.33     5311.09     5228.50       44.24
numa03.sh      Real:      790.95      856.35      826.41       24.11
numa03.sh       Sys:      114.93      118.85      117.05        1.63
numa03.sh      User:    60990.99    64959.28    63470.43     1415.44
numa04.sh      Real:      434.37      597.92      504.87       59.70
numa04.sh       Sys:      237.63      397.40      289.74       55.98
numa04.sh      User:    34854.87    41121.83    38572.52     2615.84
numa05.sh      Real:      386.77      448.90      417.22       22.79
numa05.sh       Sys:      149.23      379.95      303.04       79.55
numa05.sh      User:    32951.76    35959.58    34562.18     1034.05

Testcase       Time:         Min         Max         Avg      StdDev 	 %Change
numa01.sh      Real:      493.19      672.88      597.51       59.38 	 -0.20%
numa01.sh       Sys:      150.09      245.48      207.76       34.26 	 -11.0%
numa01.sh      User:    41928.51    53779.17    48747.06     3901.39 	 0.059%
numa02.sh      Real:       60.63       62.87       61.22        0.83 	 -0.39%
numa02.sh       Sys:       16.64       27.97       20.25        4.06 	 4.691%
numa02.sh      User:     5222.92     5309.60     5254.03       29.98 	 -0.48%
numa03.sh      Real:      821.52      902.15      863.60       32.41 	 -4.30%
numa03.sh       Sys:      112.04      130.66      118.35        7.08 	 -1.09%
numa03.sh      User:    62245.16    69165.14    66443.04     2450.32 	 -4.47%
numa04.sh      Real:      414.53      519.57      476.25       37.00 	 6.009%
numa04.sh       Sys:      181.84      335.67      280.41       54.07 	 3.327%
numa04.sh      User:    33924.50    39115.39    37343.78     1934.26 	 3.290%
numa05.sh      Real:      408.30      441.45      417.90       12.05 	 -0.16%
numa05.sh       Sys:      233.41      381.60      295.58       57.37 	 2.523%
numa05.sh      User:    33301.31    35972.50    34335.19      938.94 	 0.661%
Signed-off-by: NSrikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: NPeter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1529514181-9842-16-git-send-email-srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.comSigned-off-by: NIngo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>