Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 28 May 2015 13:49:13 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] sched: prefer an idle cpu vs an idle sibling for BALANCE_WAKE |
| |
* Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@novell.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 12:21 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > In fact, select_idle_sibling() is already too expensive on current > > server hardware (far too damn many cpus in a LLC domain). > > Yup. I've played with rate limiting motion per task because of that. > Packages have gotten way too damn big.
What's the biggest you've seen?
Thanks,
Ingo
| |