[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1253949740.4924.34.camel@Palantir>
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 09:22:20 +0200
From: Raistlin <raistlin@...ux.it>
To: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michael Trimarchi <trimarchi@...dalf.sssup.it>,
sat <takeuchi_satoru@...fujitsu.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Con Kolivas <kernel@...ivas.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: massive_intr on CFS, BFS, and EDF
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 16:46 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 09/25/2009 04:37 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > afaiu he doesn't, he simply splits the task's wcet between parent and
> > child and (intends?) to feed back on child exit.
>
> How does this work if we have one parent task that forks off a bunch of
> kids like massive_intr? Does each child get half the bandwidth of the
> previous child?
>
Yes, that's exactly how I think it goes... Moreover, also the parent's
bandwidth is halved at each fork, which make things very odd in
workloads like massive_intr! :-(
> Right...so would it perhaps be more interesting to try a modified test
> where each child's bandwidth is equal and small enough that there is no
> oversubscription?
>
So right! I think that should be the way to go, and I'll try to do
something like this as soon as I can... I promise... :-D
Regards,
Dario
--
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, ReTiS Lab, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa (Italy)
http://blog.linux.it/raistlin / raistlin@...ga.net /
dario.faggioli@...ber.org
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (198 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists