[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130501121421.GA19602@dyad.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 14:14:22 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, 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 v4 0/6] sched: use runnable load based balance
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 01:25:38PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> This patchset bases on tip/sched/core.
>
> The patchset remove the burst wakeup detection which had worked fine on 3.8
Was this part of the original series from PJT or some patches afterwards?
I missed a few months worth of patches so any extra information to help me
catch up is greatly appreciated :-)
> kernel, since the aim7 is very imbalance. But rwsem write lock stealing
> enabled in 3.9 kernel. aim7 imbalance disappeared. So the burst wakeup
> care doesn't needed.
How does this follow.. surely something else can cause burst wakeups just fine
too?
> Peter,
> Would you like to consider pick up the patchset? or give some comments? :)
I'll go read them.. :-)
--
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