[lkml]   [2003]   [Jul]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Lse-tech] Re: [patch] scheduler fix for 1cpu/node case

>> If you want data supporting my assumptions: Ted Ts'o's talk at OLS
>> shows the necessity to rebalance ASAP (even in try_to_wake_up).

>If this is the patch I am thinking of, it was the (attached) one I sent
>which did a light "push" rebalance at try_to_wake_up. Calling
>at try_to_wake_up seems very heavy-weight. This patch only looks for an
>cpu (within the same node) to wake up on before task activation, only if
>task_rq(p)->nr_running is too long. So, yes, I do believe this can be
>important, but I think it's only called for when we have an idle cpu.

The patch that you sent to Rajan didn't yield any improvement on
specjappserver so we did not include that in the ols paper. What
is described in the ols paper is "calling load-balance" from
try-to-wake-up. Both calling load-balance from try-to-wakeup and
the "light push" rebalance at try_to_wake_up are already done in
Andrea's 0(1) scheduler patch.


Mala Anand
IBM Linux Technology Center - Kernel Performance
Phone:838-8088; Tie-line:678-8088

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:47    [W:0.034 / U:3.480 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site