[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1290167844.2109.1560.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:57:24 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@...-lyon.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Hans-Peter Jansen <hpj@...la.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Lennart Poettering <mzxreary@...inter.de>, david@...g.hm,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH v3] sched: automated per tty task groups
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 01:07 +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
>
> Also note that having a hierarchical process structure should permit to
> make things globally more efficient: avoid putting e.g. your cpp, cc1,
> and asm processes at three corners of your 4-socket NUMA machine :)
We have the hierarchy mandated by POSIX to track parents, childs,
sessions and all that stuff, its just not the data structure used for
scheduling.
And no, using that to load-balance between CPUs doesn't necessarily help
with the NUMA case, load-balancing is an impossible job (equivalent to
page-replacement -- you simply don't know the future), applications
simply do wildly weird stuff.
>From a process hierarchy there's absolutely no difference between a
cc1/cpp/asm and some MPI jobs, both can be parent-child relations with
pipes between, some just run short and have data affinity, others run
long and don't have any.
--
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