[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120502103453.GB22740@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 16:04:53 +0530
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, pjt@...gle.com, suresh.b.siddha@...el.com,
efault@....de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/5] sched, fair: Let minimally loaded cpu balance
the group
* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> [2012-05-02 12:31:30]:
> > IOW :
> >
> > balance_load = 0 iff idle_cpu(i) ??
>
> I think so, even for !0 load_idx, load will only reach zero when we're
> idle, just takes longer.
Right ...so should we force it to select a idle_cpu by having
balance_load = 0 for a idle cpu (ignoring what target_load(i, load_idx)
told us as its load?
- vatsa
--
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