[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170824204448.if2mve3iy5k425di@techsingularity.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 21:44:48 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: Break up long wake list walk
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:16:15AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > These changes look fine. We are testing them now.
> > Does the second patch in the series look okay to you?
>
> I didn't really have any reaction to that one, as long as Mel&co are
> ok with it, I'm fine with it.
>
I've no strong objections or concerns. I'm disappointed that the
original root cause for this could not be found but hope that eventually a
reproducible test case will eventually be available. Despite having access
to a 4-socket box, I was still unable to create a workload that caused
large delays on wakeup. I'm going to have to stop as I don't think it's
possible to create on that particular machine for whatever reason.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists