lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Patch] don't kick ALB in the presence of pinned task
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>>
>>Hmm, I would have hoped the new "all_pinned" logic should have handled
>>this case properly. [...]
>
>
> no, active_balance is a different case, not covered by the all_pinned
> logic. This is a HT-special scenario, where busiest->nr_running == 1,
> and we have to do active load-balancing. This does not go through
> move_tasks() and does not set all_pinned. (If nr_running werent 1 we'd
> not have to kick active load-balancing.)
>

Yeah I see. It looks like Suresh's patch should do a reasonable
job at doing "all pinned backoff" too, using the existing logic.
So I agree - great catch.

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-02 12:11    [W:0.077 / U:0.656 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site