[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADcy93WdRjirmjYHOFp-J_==uEK=giQAe6nPS+Pj6QYafnwJJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 22:52:35 +0800
From: Xunlei Pang <pang.xunlei@...aro.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Morten Rasmussen <Morten.Rasmussen@....com>,
kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, riel@...hat.com,
Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
efault@....de, dietmar.eggemann@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 08/11] sched: replace capacity_factor by usage
Hi Vincent,
On 27 February 2015 at 23:54, Vincent Guittot
<vincent.guittot@...aro.org> wrote:
> /**
> @@ -6432,18 +6435,19 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *sd
>
> /*
> * In case the child domain prefers tasks go to siblings
> - * first, lower the sg capacity factor to one so that we'll try
> + * first, lower the sg capacity so that we'll try
> * and move all the excess tasks away. We lower the capacity
> * of a group only if the local group has the capacity to fit
> - * these excess tasks, i.e. nr_running < group_capacity_factor. The
> - * extra check prevents the case where you always pull from the
> - * heaviest group when it is already under-utilized (possible
> - * with a large weight task outweighs the tasks on the system).
> + * these excess tasks. The extra check prevents the case where
> + * you always pull from the heaviest group when it is already
> + * under-utilized (possible with a large weight task outweighs
> + * the tasks on the system).
> */
> if (prefer_sibling && sds->local &&
> - sds->local_stat.group_has_free_capacity) {
> - sgs->group_capacity_factor = min(sgs->group_capacity_factor, 1U);
> - sgs->group_type = group_classify(sg, sgs);
> + group_has_capacity(env, &sds->local_stat) &&
> + (sgs->sum_nr_running > 1)) {
> + sgs->group_no_capacity = 1;
> + sgs->group_type = group_overloaded;
> }
>
For SD_PREFER_SIBLING, if local has 1 task and group_has_capacity()
returns true(but not overloaded) for it, and assume sgs group has 2
tasks, should we still mark this group overloaded?
-Xunlei
--
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