Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 24 Mar 2015 16:53:52 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [RFCv3 PATCH 33/48] sched: Energy-aware wake-up task placement |
| |
On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 03:42:42PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > Right, I agree that we should preferably do the normal thing for U ~= 1. > We can restructure the wake-up path to follow that pattern, but we need > to know U beforehand to choose the right path. U isn't just > get_cpu_usage(prev_cpu) but some broader view of the of the cpu > utilizations. For example, prev_cpu might be full, but everyone else is > idle so we still want to try to do an energy aware wake-up on some other > cpu. U could be the minium utilization of all cpus in prev_cpu's > sd_llc, which is somewhat similar to what energy_aware_wake_cpu() does.
Yeah, or a setting in the root domain set by the regular periodic load balancer; that already grew some mojo to determine this in a patch I recently commented on.
> I guess energy_aware_wake_cpu() could be refactored to call > select_idle_sibling() if it find U ~= 1?
Sure yeah, that's not the hard part I think.
| |