> > Maybe the predication is reasonable on per task history. but on a cpu > load history, with many tasks rebalance. No testing show current method > is helpful. > > For task load change, scheduler has no idea for its future except guess > from its history. but for cpu load change, scheduler know this from task > wakeup and balance, which both under control and its aim. > > > I think the first patch of this serial has the same effect of LB_LIAS > disable. and previous result show performance is good. > > Anyway, I just pushed the following patch to github, maybe fengguang's > testing system will care this.
Fengguang, Are there any performance change on https://github.com/alexshi/power-scheduling.git noload repository? > > diff --git a/kernel/sched/features.h b/kernel/sched/features.h > index 5716929..0bf649f 100644 > --- a/kernel/sched/features.h > +++ b/kernel/sched/features.h > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ SCHED_FEAT(ARCH_POWER, true) > > SCHED_FEAT(HRTICK, false) > SCHED_FEAT(DOUBLE_TICK, false) > -SCHED_FEAT(LB_BIAS, true) > +SCHED_FEAT(LB_BIAS, false) > > -- Thanks Alex -- 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/
