[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071119160647.GV3359@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 21:36:47 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: dmitry.adamushko@...il.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
efault@....de, skumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched: Improve fairness of cpu allocation for task groups
On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 04:22:58PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > - inc/dec_load() takes a load input instead of task pointer input as their
> > 2nd arg
> > - inc/dec_nr_running don't call inc/dec_load. Instead,
> > - enqueue/dequeue_task class callbacks call inc/dec_load
> > - [Unintended/will-fix change] min/max tunables added in
> > /proc/sys/kernel
> >
> > All of above changes (except last, which I will fix) should have zero
> > functional+runtime effect for !CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED case. So I
> > don't see how I can split Patch 2/2 further.
>
> ok, as long as it's NOP for the CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED, we could try
> it.
Ok ..thx. I was begining to make changes to avoid even the above minor changes
for !CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED case, but it doesn't look neat, hence will drop
that effort.
I am fixing other problems observed with Patch 1/2 (usage of a mutex to
serialize create/destroy groups) and will resend the series very soon.
--
Regards,
vatsa
-
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