lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements
    From
    Date
    On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 11:02 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > On Wed, 2009-09-09 at 10:52 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
    > > @@ -1502,7 +1502,8 @@ static void check_preempt_wakeup(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int sync)
    > > */
    > > if (sched_feat(LAST_BUDDY) && likely(se->on_rq && curr != rq->idle))
    > > set_last_buddy(se);
    > > - set_next_buddy(pse);
    > > + if (sched_feat(NEXT_BUDDY))
    > > + set_next_buddy(pse);
    > >
    > > /*
    > > * We can come here with TIF_NEED_RESCHED already set from new task
    >
    > You might want to test stuff like sysbench again, iirc we went on a
    > cache-trashing rampage without buddies.
    >
    > Our goal is not to excel at any one load but to not suck at any one
    > load.

    Oh absolutely. I wouldn't want buddies disabled by default, I only
    added the buddy knob to test effects on fork/exec.

    I only posted to patch to give Jens something canned to try out.

    -Mike



    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-09-09 11:21    [W:0.025 / U:29.872 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site