Re: [patch 6/8] pull RT tasks

[Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>]

--
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > > +
> > > +	if (likely(!atomic_read(&rt_overload)))
> > > +		return 0;
> >
> > This seems to be the only usage of rt_overload. I'm not sure its worth
> > keeping it around for this.
>
> Ingo just brought up a good point. With large smp (where large is >64)
> this will all suck chunks.
>
> rt_overload will bounce around the system, and the rto_cpumask updates
> might already hurt.
>
> The idea would be to do this per cpuset, these naturally limit the
> migraiton posibilities of tasks and would thus be the natural locality
> to break this data structure.
>

That sounds like a good idea. RT balancing on >64 CPUs should be limited.
Having a bounding cpuset would help.

I'll try to come up with something.

Thanks!

-- Steve

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