Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Wed, 09 Sep 2009 11:18:43 +0200 |
| |
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
| |