On Mon, 2013-02-18 at 04:42 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 16:54 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 08:14 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > (And puts a dent in x264 ultrafast) > > > What about my last patch? The one that avoids idle_balance() if the > > previous task was in a task_uninterruptible state. That one gave the > > same performance increase that removing idle_balance() did on my box. > > I didn't try it, figuring it was pretty much the same as turning it off, > but just did. Patch (-typo) has no effect on either x264 or hackbench > (surely will for -rt, but rt tasks here aren't sent to burn in rt hell).
So it had no effect to your tests? That's actually good, as if it has a positive effect on some workloads and no effect on others, that's still a net win. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
