[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191008175537.GC22902@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2019 19:55:37 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com, pauld@...hat.com,
valentin.schneider@....com, srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
quentin.perret@....com, dietmar.eggemann@....com,
Morten.Rasmussen@....com, hdanton@...a.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] sched/fair: rework load_balance
On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 09:33:35AM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> + if (busiest->group_type == group_asym_packing) {
> + /*
> + * In case of asym capacity, we will try to migrate all load to
> + * the preferred CPU.
> + */
> + env->balance_type = migrate_load;
> env->imbalance = busiest->group_load;
> return;
> }
I was a bit surprised with this; I sorta expected a migrate_task,1 here.
The asym_packing thing has always been a nr_running issue to me. If
there is something to run, we should run on as many siblings/cores as
possible, but preferably the 'highest' ranked siblings/cores.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists