linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150327064331.GA5419@kernel>
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 2015 14:43:31 +0800
From:	Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Cc:	Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...nel.org, riel@...hat.com, daniel.lezcano@...aro.org,
	vincent.guittot@...aro.org, srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	pjt@...gle.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org, efault@....de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, iamjoonsoo.kim@....com,
	svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com,
	morten.rasmussen@....com, Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle
 CPUs

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:07:21PM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
>On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 10:12 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>> Hi Preeti,
>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 06:32:44PM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
>> >
>> >1. An ILB CPU was chosen from the first numa domain to trigger nohz idle
>> >load balancing [Given the experiment, upto 6 CPUs per core could be
>> >potentially idle in this domain.]
>> >
>> >2. However the ILB CPU would call load_balance() on itself before
>> >initiating nohz idle load balancing.
>> >
>> >3. Given cores are SMT8, the ILB CPU had enough opportunities to pull
>> >tasks from its sibling cores to even out load.
>> >
>> >4. Now that the ILB CPU was no longer idle, it would abort nohz idle
>> >load balancing
>> 
>> I don't see abort nohz idle load balancing when ILB CPU was no longer idle 
>> in nohz_idle_balance(), could you explain more in details?
>
>Hi Wanpeng,
>
>In nohz_idle_balance(), there is a check for need_resched() so if the
>cpu has something to run, it should exit nohz_idle_balance(), which may
>cause it to not do the idle balancing on the other CPUs.

Got it, thanks. ;)

Regards,
Wanpeng Li 

>
>
--
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/