Re: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 11:15:16AM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > especially on NUMA, if the migration-target CPU (this_cpu) is not at 
> > least partially idle, i'd be quite uneasy to passive balance from 
> > another node. I suspect this needs numbers from Martin and John?
> 
> Passive balancing cuts in only when an imbalance is becoming apparent.
> If the queue gets more imbalanced, periodic balancing will cut in,
> and that is much worse than wake balancing.

Another point to note about the current wake balance. Imbalance calculation
is not taking the complete load of the sched group into account. I think
there might be scenario's where the current wake balance will actually
result in some imbalances corrected later by periodic balancing.

thanks,
suresh
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • Re: Delete scheduler SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE flags
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • RE: Delete scheduler SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE flags
    • From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <[email protected]>
  • [patch] remove wake-balancing
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • [sched, patch] better wake-balancing
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #2
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [RFC,PATCH] RCU and CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT sane patch
• Next by Date: RE: 2.6.13-rc4-mm1
• Previous by thread: Re: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
• Next by thread: RE: [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]