[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191030155829.GL3016@techsingularity.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 15:58:29 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, pauld@...hat.com, valentin.schneider@....com,
srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, quentin.perret@....com,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, Morten.Rasmussen@....com,
hdanton@...a.com, parth@...ux.ibm.com, riel@...riel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/11] sched/fair: use load instead of runnable load
in load_balance
On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 03:26:33PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> runnable load has been introduced to take into account the case
> where blocked load biases the load balance decision which was selecting
> underutilized group with huge blocked load whereas other groups were
> overloaded.
>
> The load is now only used when groups are overloaded. In this case,
> it's worth being conservative and taking into account the sleeping
> tasks that might wakeup on the cpu.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Hmm.... ok. Superficially I get what you're doing but worry slightly
about groups that have lots of tasks that are frequently idling on short
periods of IO.
Unfortuntely when I queued this series for testing I did not queue a load
that idles rapidly for short durations that would highlight problems in
that area.
I cannot convince myself it's ok enough for an ack but I have no reason
to complain either.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists