[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070417062735.GB12385@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 08:27:35 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Cc: Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@...pond.net.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, caglar@...dus.org.tr,
Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS (Completely Fair Scheduler), v2
* Willy Tarreau <w@....eu> wrote:
> Have you tried previous version with the fair-fork patch ? It might be
> possible that your workload is sensible to the fork()'s child getting
> much CPU upon startup.
the fair-fork patch is now included in -v2, but that was already in
-v2-rc0 too that i sent to Gene separately. I've attached the
-rc0->final delta.
Gene, could you please apply this patch to your -v2-rc0 tree and do a
quick double-check that indeed these changes cause the regression?
Ingo
View attachment "sched-cfs-v2-rc0-final-delta.patch" of type "text/plain" (22653 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists