On 06/03/2013 11:09 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 10:28 +0800, Michael Wang wrote: >> On 05/28/2013 01:05 PM, Michael Wang wrote: >>> wake-affine stuff is always trying to pull wakee close to waker, by theory, >>> this will bring benefit if waker's cpu cached hot data for wakee, or the >>> extreme ping-pong case. >>> >>> And testing show it could benefit hackbench 15% at most. >>> >>> However, the whole stuff is somewhat blindly and time-consuming, some >>> workload therefore suffer. >>> >>> And testing show it could damage pgbench 50% at most. >>> >>> Thus, wake-affine stuff should be smarter, and realise when to stop >>> it's thankless effort. >> >> Is there any comments? > > (I haven't had time to test-drive yet, -rt munches time like popcorn)
I see ;-) During my testing, this one works well on the box, solved the issues of pgbench and won't harm hackbench any, I think we have caught some good point here :) Regards, Michael Wang > > -- > 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/ > -- 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/
