[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51877A5C.5020903@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 06 May 2013 17:39:40 +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, bp@...en8.de, pjt@...gle.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, efault@....de, morten.rasmussen@....com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mgorman@...e.de, riel@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 7/7] sched: consider runnable load average in effective_load
>
> But actually I'm wondering whether it is necessary to change
> effective_load()?
>
> It is only severed for wake-affine and the whole stuff is still in the
> dark, if patch 1~6 already show good results, why don't we leave it there?
It is used for pipe connected process, and your testing showed it is can
not be removed simply. so..
>
--
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