[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161129114419.GC20785@codeblueprint.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:44:19 +0000
From: Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@....com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>, mingo@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
kernellwp@...il.com, yuyang.du@...el.com, umgwanakikbuti@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] sched: fix find_idlest_group for fork
On Tue, 29 Nov, at 12:42:43PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> IIRC, and my pounding head really doesn't remember much, the comment
> reads like we need the large fudge factor because hackbench. That is,
> hackbench would like this test to go away, but others benchmarks will
> tank.
>
> Now, if only I would've written down which benchmarks that were.. awell.
Going out on a limb: Chris' schbench?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists