[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1252311854.7586.31.camel@marge.simson.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 10:24:14 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Ani <asinha@...gmasystems.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: question on sched-rt group allocation cap: sched_rt_runtime_us
On Mon, 2009-09-07 at 09:59 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 08:32 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-09-05 at 19:32 -0700, Ani wrote:
> > > On Sep 5, 3:50 pm, Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.mar...@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Indeed. I've tested this same test program in a single core machine and it
> > > > produces the expected behavior:
> > > >
> > > > rt_runtime_us / rt_period_us % loops executed in SCHED_OTHER
> > > > 95% 4.48%
> > > > 60% 54.84%
> > > > 50% 86.03%
> > > > 40% OTHER completed first
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm. This does seem to indicate that there is some kind of
> > > relationship with SMP. So I wonder whether there is a way to turn this
> > > 'RT bandwidth accumulation' heuristic off.
> >
> > No there isn't..
>
> Actually there is, use cpusets to carve the system into partitions.
Yeah, I stand corrected. I tend to think in terms of the dirt simplest
configuration only.
-Mike
--
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