On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 03:50:12PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 04:20:51PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > On systems with asymmetric cpu capacities, a skewed load distribution > > might yield better throughput than balancing load per group capacity. > > For example, preferring high capacity cpus for compute intensive tasks > > leaving low capacity cpus idle rather than balancing the number of idle > > cpus across different cpu types. Instead, let load-balance back off if > > the busiest group isn't really overloaded. > > I'm sorry. I just can't seem to make sense of that today. What?
Aah, you're saying that is we have 4+4 bit.little and 4 runnable tasks, we would like them running on our big cluster and leave the small cluster entirely idle, instead of runnint 2+2. So what about this DynamicQ nonsense? Or is that so unstructured we can't really do anything sensible with it?
