[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150220113447.GO5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 12:34:47 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"riel@...hat.com" <riel@...hat.com>,
"efault@....de" <efault@....de>,
"nicolas.pitre@...aro.org" <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <Dietmar.Eggemann@....com>,
"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v9 00/10] sched: consolidation of CPU capacity and
usage
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 12:49:40PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> Also, it still not clear why patch 10 uses relative capacity reduction
> instead of absolute capacity available to CFS tasks.
As present in your asymmetric big and small systems? Yes it would be
unfortunate to migrate a task to an idle small core when the big core is
still faster, even if reduced by rt/irq work.
--
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