From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:08:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1363082932.14933.19.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <513E9FC6.4060507@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Does something simple like a per-task throttle of wake_affine() gain
similar benefits? Say something like only do wake_affine() once every
10 ms or so (counting on the wakee, not waker).
The rationale being that wake_affine() relies on load-balance
statistics that aren't updated that much faster, so calling it more
often than that seems pointless.
Something like that should take a lot less lines to implement.
Just wondering..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-12 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 7:06 [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy Michael Wang
2013-03-07 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-07 9:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 2:37 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 6:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 7:30 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 8:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-11 2:42 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 9:46 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:31 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 8:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-11 9:14 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 6:00 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-12 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 9:41 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:33 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:50 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-12 3:23 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-12 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-03-13 3:07 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-14 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-15 6:24 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-18 3:26 ` Michael Wang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1363082932.14933.19.camel@laptop \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.