[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250317172536.GF6888@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 18:25:36 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>,
"Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@....com>,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] sched/fair: Propagate load balancing stats up
the sched domain hierarchy
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 09:37:38AM +0000, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> tl;dr
>
> This prototype is currently limited in the sense that it can only reuse
> statistics for busy load balancing. Reusing stats for newidle load
> balancing specifically ran into issues elaborated below.
Right, it makes sense for busy load balance, newidle I think:
> David had proposed SHARED_RUNQ [4] to improve on the shortcomings of
> newidle balance for Meta's production workloads.
we need to look at this again. Something around the EEVDF merge made the
thing unhappy -- if we figure out what and fix it, I think this makes
more sense than trying to optimize the current scheme for newidle.
newidle really is about getting *any* work fast, which is a totally
different game than the regular busy balancing.
Anyway, I'll try and have a look through the patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists