Re: [patch 0/2] fix perf. bug in wake-up load balancing for aim7 and db workload

* Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:

> > We should back out the above commit and add a sysctl variable to control the
> > behavior of load balancing in wake up path, so user can dynamically select
> > a mode that best fit for the workload environment.  And kernel can achieve
> > best performance in two extreme ends of incompatible workload environments.
> 
> Well I don't see any benchmark numbers in the original patch.  Just an 
> assertion that it "should" help something.
> 
> I'm more inclined to revert it and not add the sysctl (ugh) until we 
> have a good reason to do so.

yeah, we should do the revert:

 Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

but i'm quite against a sysctl knob. Especially not for 2.6.16.

	Ingo
-
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:
- [patch 0/2] fix perf. bug in wake-up load balancing for aim7 and db workload
  - From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch 0/2] fix perf. bug in wake-up load balancing for aim7 and db workload
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: Kernel BUG at include/linux/gfp.h:80
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 01/13] hrtimer: round up relative start time
Previous by thread: RE: [patch 0/2] fix perf. bug in wake-up load balancing for aim7 and db workload
Next by thread: RE: [patch 0/2] fix perf. bug in wake-up load balancing for aim7 and db workload
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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