On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 09:34 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> I think the construction stuff works fine, and !->sd is the perfect cue
> to tell various things to keep their grubby mitts off of a CPU.
Take idle_balance() for instance.. not much point in dropping rq->lock
just to take it again after d
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 15:28 +0800, Lei Wen wrote:
> Actually, what I have experiment is as:
> 1. set top cpuset as disable load balance
> 2. set 0-2 cpus to "system", and enable its load balance
> 3. set 3 cpu to "rt" and disable load balance.
Exactly as I do, pertinent part of my cheezy script b
Mike,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 10:23 +0800, Lei Wen wrote:
>> Cpu which is put into quiescent mode, would remove itself
>> from kernel's sched_domain, and want others not disturb its
>> task running. But current scheduler would not checking wh
On Fri, 2014-02-21 at 10:23 +0800, Lei Wen wrote:
> Cpu which is put into quiescent mode, would remove itself
> from kernel's sched_domain, and want others not disturb its
> task running. But current scheduler would not checking whether
> that cpu is setting in such mode, and still insist the quie
4 matches
Mail list logo
