Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity with nr_running | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Mon, 13 Sep 2010 06:35:47 +0200 |
| |
On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 11:06 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Sat, 2010-09-11 at 13:48 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > And I don't like how you dismissed the measured latency improvement. > > And yes, I do think latency matters. A _lot_. > > OK, we'll make it better and sacrifice some throughput, can do, no > problem.
I'm not seeing high wakeup latencies, even under hefty load. Mathieu's testcase is bad, but apparently solely due to START_DEBIT placement. That's kind of a sticky wicket. I've shot it in the heart before, but regretted doing so when I looked at kbuild vs static load fairness.
-Mike
| |