[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtB_GGb2eZqWfmKrY3-Z9spN9wzU4pXMGz38bAZu8ExCMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 16:29:06 +0100
From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Abel Wu <wuyun.abel@...edance.com>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] introduce sched-idle balancing
On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 at 16:20, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:43:56PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote:
> > Current load balancing is mainly based on cpu capacity
> > and task util, which makes sense in the POV of overall
> > throughput. While there still might be some improvement
> > can be done by reducing number of overloaded cfs rqs if
> > sched-idle or idle rq exists.
>
> I'm much confused, there is an explicit new-idle balancer and a periodic
> idle balancer already there.
I agree, You failed to explain why newly_idle and periodic idle load
balance are not enough and we need this new one
Powered by blists - more mailing lists