[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070423092502.GA7972@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 11:25:02 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>,
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,
Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@...il.com>, Mark Lord <lkml@....ca>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v5
* Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de> wrote:
> > yeah - but they'll all be quad core, so the SMP timeslice
> > multiplicator should do the trick. Most of the CFS testers use
> > single-CPU systems.
>
> But desktop users could have have quad thread and even 8 thread CPUs
> soon, [...]
SMT is indeed an issue, so i think what should be used to scale
timeslices isnt num_online_cpus(), but the sum of all CPU's ->cpu_power
value (scaled down by SCHED_LOAD_SCALE). That way if the thread is not a
'full CPU', then the scaling will be proportionally smaller. Can you see
any hole in that?
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists