[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b9df5fa10912230452q6edac4d3wb837a2e550cc5092@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 18:52:34 +0600
From: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: SCHED: Is task migration necessary in sched_exec().
On 12/23/09, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 18:04 +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> > On 12/23/09, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-12-23 at 17:35 +0600, Rakib Mullick wrote:
>
> So its a win, right?
>
Yes - a fair win. But if load balancer moves other tasks from the runqueue
(2nd or 3rd task from your ex.) and thats how we also can achive 1/2 of cpu1's
time , right? Those waiting tasks could have effective 0 cache footprint too.
If they were not run before - right?
>
>
--
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