[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <47B42167.BA47.005A.0@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2008 09:09:27 -0700
From: "Gregory Haskins" <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To: "Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Dhaval Giani" <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Srivatsa Vaddagiri" <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Paul Jackson" <pj@....com>
Cc: "LKML" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] reworking load_balance_monitor
>>> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:57 AM, in message
<20080214155724.772744000@...llo.nl>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here the current patches that rework load_balance_monitor.
>
> The main reason for doing this is to eliminate the wakeups the thing
> generates,
> esp. on an idle system. The bonus is that it removes a kernel thread.
>
> Paul, Gregory - the thing that bothers me most atm is the lack of
> rd->load_balance. Should I introduce that (-rt ought to make use of that as
> well) by way of copying from the top sched_domain when it gets created?
With the caveat that I currently have not digested your patch series, this sounds like a reasonable approach. The root-domain effectively represents the top sched-domain anyway (with the additional attribute that its a shared structure with all constituent cpus).
Ill try to take a look at the series later today and get back to you with feedback.
-Greg
--
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