lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/5] Use next_balance instead of last_balance
Nick Piggin wrote:
> Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
>> Use next_balance instead of last_balance ...
>>
>> The cpu offset calculation in the sched_domains code makes it
>> difficult to
>> figure out when the next event is supposed to happen since we only keep
>> track of the last_balancing. We want to know when the next load balance
>> is supposed to occur.
>>
>> Move the cpu offset calculation into build_sched_domains(). Do the
>> setup of the staggered load balance schewduling when the sched domains
>> are initialized. That way we dont have to worry about it anymore later.
>>
>> This also in turn simplifies the load balancing time checks.
>
>
> OK. I think I made this overcomplex in order to cope with issues where
> offset can get skewed so if we're unlucky they might all get into synch
> ... but this new code isn't any worse than the old, and it is cheaper.
>
> So, Ack.

Actually, it is wrong, so nack.

You didn't take into account that balance_interval may have changed,
and so might the idle status.

--
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: 2006-10-26 14:37    [W:0.048 / U:1.876 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site