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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans