lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 04:30:08PM -0500, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 03:25:15PM -0500, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> >
> >> It sounds like the problem with my code is that "null sched domain"
> >> translates into "default root-domain" which is understandably unexpected
> >> by Dimitri (and myself). Really I intended root-domains to become
> >> associated with each exclusive/disjoint cpuset that is created. In a
> >> way, non-balanced/isolated cpus could be modeled as an exclusive cpuset
> >> with one member, but that is somewhat beyond the scope of the
> >>
> >
> > Actually, at one time, that is how things were setup. Setting the
> > cpu_exclusive bit on a single cpu cpuset would isolate that cpu from
> > load balancing.
> >
> Do you know if this was pre or post the root-domain code? Here is a
> reference to the commit:

It was pre root-domain. That behavior was replaced by addition of the sched_load_balance flag with the following commit (though it was actually removed even earlier):

http://git2.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=029190c515f15f512ac85de8fc686d4dbd0ae731

>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=57d885fea0da0e9541d7730a9e1dcf734981a173
>
> A bisection that shows when this last worked for you would be very
> appreciated if you have the time, Dimitri.
>
> Regards,
> -Greg
>
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-19 22:51    [W:0.055 / U:5.124 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site