[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161018111017.GY3142@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 13:10:17 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not decay new task load on first enqueue
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 11:29:37AM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Oct, at 11:24:53AM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> >
> > That's a lot more costly cross-DIE migrations. I think this patch is
> > along the right lines, but there's something fishy happening on this
> > box.
>
> I wasn't really able to track down why this machine regressed, and the
> patch shows enough improvement for other boxes that I think it's worth
> sticking in tip/sched/core.
>
I'm entirely lost as to which patch we're talking about by now ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists