From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758548AbYEVUJU (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 May 2008 16:09:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754726AbYEVUJK (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 May 2008 16:09:10 -0400 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:37544 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753001AbYEVUJJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 May 2008 16:09:09 -0400 Subject: Re: fair group scheduler not so fair? From: Peter Zijlstra To: Chris Friesen Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@elte.hu, pj@sgi.com In-Reply-To: <4835D14B.20904@nortel.com> References: <4834B75A.40900@nortel.com> <1211439417.29104.7.camel@twins> <4835D14B.20904@nortel.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 22:07:48 +0200 Message-Id: <1211486868.6463.134.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 14:02 -0600, Chris Friesen wrote: > I haven't really dug into the scheduler yet (although that's next), but > based on these results it doesn't really look like the load balancer is > properly group-aware. I'm trying, but its turning out to be rather more difficult than expected. Any help here would be much appreciated.