From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: Andrew Theurer <habanero@us.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ricklind@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [patch] HT scheduler, sched-2.5.68-B2
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 15:38:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1574320000.1051137515@flay> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1538380000.1051123399@flay>
>>> > - turn off the more agressive idle-steal variant. This could fix the
>>> > low-load regression reported by Martin J. Bligh.
>>>
>>> Yup, that fixed it (I tested just your first version with just that
>>> bit altered).
>>
>> Can we make this an arch specific option? I have a feeling the HT performance
>> on low loads will actually drop with this disabled.
Actually, what must be happening here is that we're agressively stealing
things on non-HT machines ... we should be able to easily prevent that.
Suppose we have 2 real cpus + HT ... A,B,C,D are the cpus, where A, B
are HT twins, and C,D are HT twins. A&B share runqueue X, and C&D share
runqueue Y
What I presume you're trying to do is when A and B are running 1 task
each, and C and D are not running anything, balance out so we have
one on A and one on C. If we define some "nr_active(rq)" concept to be
the number of tasks actually actively running on cpus, then if we we're
switching from nr_actives of 2/0 to 1/0.
However, we don't want to switch from 2/1 to 1/2 ... that's pointless.
Or 0/1 to 1/0 (which I think it's what's happening). But in the case
where we had (theoretically) 4 HT siblings per real cpu, we would want
to migrate 1/3 to 2/2.
The key is that we want to agressively steal when
nr_active(remote) - nr_active(idle) > 1 ... not > 0.
This will implicitly *never* happen on non HT machines, so it seems
like a nice algorithm ... ?
M.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-23 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-23 16:23 [patch] HT scheduler, sched-2.5.68-B2 Ingo Molnar
2003-04-23 17:47 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-23 17:53 ` Andrew Theurer
2003-04-23 18:43 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-04-23 20:14 ` Andrew Theurer
2003-04-24 8:43 ` Rick Lindsley
2003-04-24 14:23 ` Andrew Theurer
2003-04-23 22:38 ` Martin J. Bligh [this message]
2003-04-24 21:29 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-04-24 22:39 ` Martin J. Bligh
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=1574320000.1051137515@flay \
--to=mbligh@aracnet.com \
--cc=habanero@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ricklind@us.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.