[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <515BDA1B.2040801@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 15:28:27 +0800
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de,
pjt@...gle.com, namhyung@...nel.org, efault@....de,
morten.rasmussen@....com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
len.brown@...el.com, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, jkosina@...e.cz,
clark.williams@...il.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
keescook@...omium.org, mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch v3 0/8] sched: use runnable avg in load balance
On 04/03/2013 03:18 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
>> > the following patch include the renamed knob, and you can tune it under
>> > /proc/sys/kernel/... to see detailed impact degree.
> Could I make the conclusion that the improvement on pgbench was caused
> by the new weighted_cpuload()?
guess too.
>
> The burst branch seems to just adopt the load in old world, if reduce
> the rate to enter that branch could regain the benefit, then I could
> confirm my supposition.
>
>> >
>> > + if (cpu_rq(this_cpu)->avg_idle < sysctl_sched_migration_cost ||
>> > + cpu_rq(prev_cpu)->avg_idle < sysctl_sched_migration_cost)
> It should be 'sysctl_sched_burst_threshold' here, isn't it? anyway, I
> will take a try with different rate.
Ops, sth wrong in my git operation.
--
Thanks Alex
--
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