Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Apr 2005 19:31:21 -0800 | From | "Siddha, Suresh B" <> | Subject | Re: [Patch] sched: remove unnecessary sched domains |
| |
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 12:07:27PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > > Appended patch removes the unnecessary scheduler domains(containing > > only one sched group) setup during the sched-domain init. > > > > For example on x86_64, we always have NUMA configured in. On Intel EM64T > > systems, top most sched domain will be of NUMA and with only one sched_group in > > it. > > > > With fork/exec balances(recent Nick's fixes in -mm tree), we always endup > > taking wrong decisions because of this topmost domain (as it contains only > > one group and find_idlest_group always returns NULL). We will endup loading > > HT package completely first, letting active load balance kickin and correct it. > > > > In general, this patch also makes sense with out recent Nick's fixes > > in -mm. > > > > Yeah, this makes sense. We may want to add some other criteria on the > removal of a domain as well (because some of the domain flags do things > that don't use groups). > > I don't like so much that we'd rely on it to fix the above problem. > There are a general class of problems with the fork/exec balancing in > that it only works on the top most domain, so it may not spread load over > lower domains very well. > > I was thinking we could fix that by running balance on fork/exec multiple > times from top to bottom level domains. I'll have to measure the cost of > doing that, because it may be worthwhile.
Agreed.
BTW, why are we setting SD_BALANCE_FORK flag for NUMA domain on i386, ia64. This should be set only on x86_64 and that too not for Intel systems.
thanks, suresh - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |