[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221114121517.vwg4rr5xb3nvwpjy@techsingularity.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 12:15:17 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@...edance.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org, bsegall@...gle.com,
mgorman@...e.de, bristot@...hat.com, vschneid@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] sched/core: Adjusting the order of scanning CPU
On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 02:43:00PM +0800, Hao Jia wrote:
> When select_idle_capacity() starts scanning for an idle CPU, it starts
> with target CPU that has already been checked in select_idle_sibling().
> So we start checking from the next CPU and try the target CPU at the end.
> Similarly for task_numa_assign(), we have just checked numa_migrate_on
> of dst_cpu, so start from the next CPU. This also works for
> steal_cookie_task(), the first scan must fail and start directly
> from the next one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hao Jia <jiahao.os@...edance.com>
Test results in general look ok so
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists