* Christoph Lameter <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tasklets are scheduled on the same cpu that triggered the tasklet.
> They are just moved to other processors if the processor goes down. So
> that aspect is fine. We just need a tasklet struct per cpu.
>
> User a per cpu tasklet to schedule rebalancing
>
> Turns out that tasklets have a flag that only allows one instance to
> run on all processors. So we need a tasklet structure for each
> processor.
Per-CPU tasklets are equivalent to softirqs, with extra complexity and
overhead ontop of it :-)
so please just introduce a rebalance softirq and attach the scheduling
rebalance tick to it. But i'd suggest to re-test on the 4096-CPU box,
maybe what 'fixed' your workload was the global serialization of the
tasklet. With a per-CPU softirq approach we are i think back to the same
situation that broke your system before.
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/
[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]
