So, I've been trying out using the runnable averages for load balance in
a few ways, but haven't actually gotten any improvement on the
benchmarks I've run. I'll post my patches once I have the numbers down,
but it's generally been about half a percent to 1% worse on the tests
I've tried.
The basi
I ran it on tip/sched/core.
--
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/
Preeti Murthy writes:
> Hi Paul,
>
> @@ -1170,20 +1178,42 @@ static inline void enqueue_entity_load_avg(struct
> cfs_rq *cfs_rq,
> struct sched_entity *se,
> int wakeup)
> {
>
li guang writes:
> 在 2012-10-24三的 02:43 -0700，tip-bot for Paul Turner写道：
>> +do {
>> +if (runnable)
>> +sa->runnable_avg_sum += delta_w;
>> +sa->runnable_avg_period += delta_w;
>> +
>> +/*
>> +
"Jan H. Schönherr" writes:
> Hi Paul.
>
> Am 23.08.2012 16:14, schrieb p...@google.com:
>> Please find attached the latest version for CFS load-tracking.
>
> Originally, I thought, this series also takes care of
> the leaf-cfs-runqueue ordering issue described here:
>
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2011/
blocked_load_avg ~= \sum_child child.runnable_avg_sum/child.runnable_avg_period
* child.weight
The thought was: So if all the children have hit zero runnable_avg_sum
(or in the case of a child task, will when they wake up), then
blocked_avg sum should also hit zero at the same and we're in theory
Preeti Murthy writes:
> Hi Paul, Ben,
>
> A few queries regarding this patch:
>
> 1.What exactly is the significance of introducing sched_avg structure
> for a runqueue? If I have
>understood correctly, sched_avg keeps track of how long a task has
> been active,
>how long has it been serv
Correct, the sum is 1..n. The maximum was chosen as 516/46742 because
that is the point when the approximation of loop + fixed point math
being used reaches a maximum, even if the ideal y^n series would cap out
slightly differently.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux
The code for this looks fine, and the feature is something people do
seem to ask for occasionally. I agree with peterz that using this
generally means you lose any guarantees (which are already imperfect
given CFS), but I suspect that cfsb is being used in overload anyways.
The docs could use a gr
Hui Su writes:
> Since 'ab93a4bc955b ("sched/fair: Remove
> distribute_running fromCFS bandwidth")',there is
> nothing to protect between raw_spin_lock_irqsave/store()
> in do_sched_cfs_slack_timer().
>
> So remove it.
Reviewed-by: Ben Segall
(I might nitpick the subject to be clear that it sh
Peng Wang writes:
> As commit 39f23ce07b93 ("sched/fair: Fix unthrottle_cfs_rq() for
> leaf_cfs_rq list") does in unthrottle_cfs_rq(), throttle_cfs_rq()
> can also use the same pattern as dequeue_task_fair().
>
> There is no functional changes.
It's generally a bit more hassle and less clear, bu
11 matches
Mail list logo
