On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 03:29:59PM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 13:22 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Subject: sched: revert load_balance_monitor() > > > > The following commit causes a number of serious regressions: > > > > commit 6b2d7700266b9402e12824e11e0099ae6a4a6a79 > > Author: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri Jan 25 21:08:00 2008 +0100 > > sched: group scheduler, fix fairness of cpu bandwidth allocation for task > > groups > > > > Namely: > > - very frequent wakeups on SMP, reported by PowerTop users. > > - cacheline trashing on (large) SMP > > - some latencies larger than 500ms > > > > While there is a mergeable patch to fix the latter, the former issues > > are IMHO not fixable in a manner suitable for .25 (we're at -rc3 now). > > Hence I propose to revert this patch and try again for .26. > > > > ( minimal revert - leaves most of the code present, just removes the > > activation > > and sysctl interface ). > > top - 14:05:56 up 3 min, 16 users, load average: 4.31, 2.14, 0.85 > Tasks: 218 total, 5 running, 213 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie > Cpu(s): 35.5%us, 64.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ P COMMAND > 5294 mikeg 20 0 1464 364 304 R 99 0.0 1:00.08 0 chew-max > 5278 root 20 0 1464 364 304 R 32 0.0 0:27.86 1 chew-max > 5279 root 20 0 1464 360 304 R 32 0.0 0:35.53 1 chew-max > 5290 root 20 0 1464 364 304 R 31 0.0 0:29.00 1 chew-max > > The minimal revert seems to leave group fairness in a worse state than > what the original patch meant to fix. Maybe a full revert would be > better? >
This is funny. The thread should not start. Did the full revert that I sent you sometime back work better? Thanks, -- regards, Dhaval -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
