[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1348494895.11847.64.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:54:55 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Srikar <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Jiannan Ouyang <ouyang@...pitt.edu>,
chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/2] kvm: Improving undercommit,overcommit scenarios
in PLE handler
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 18:59 +0530, Raghavendra K T wrote:
> However Rik had a genuine concern in the cases where runqueue is not
> equally distributed and lockholder might actually be on a different run
> queue but not running.
Load should eventually get distributed equally -- that's what the
load-balancer is for -- so this is a temporary situation.
We already try and favour the non running vcpu in this case, that's what
yield_to_task_fair() is about. If its still not eligible to run, tough
luck.
> Do you think instead of using rq->nr_running, we could get a global
> sense of load using avenrun (something like avenrun/num_onlinecpus)
To what purpose? Also, global stuff is expensive, so you should try and
stay away from it as hard as you possibly can.
--
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