From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>
Cc: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"vincent.guittot@linaro.org" <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
"daniel.lezcano@linaro.org" <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
"fweisbec@gmail.com" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"linux@arm.linux.org.uk" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
"fenghua.yu@intel.com" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"akpm@linux-foundation.org" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"arjan@linux.intel.com" <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
"pjt@google.com" <pjt@google.com>,
"fengguang.wu@intel.com" <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
"james.hogan@imgtec.com" <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
"jason.low2@hp.com" <jason.low2@hp.com>,
"gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"hanjun.guo@linaro.org" <hanjun.guo@linaro.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched: bias to target cpu load to reduce task moving
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 21:37:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140107203752.GC2480@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140107151632.GF2936@e103034-lin>
On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 03:16:32PM +0000, Morten Rasmussen wrote:
> From a load perspective wouldn't it be better to pick the least loaded
> cpu in the group? It is not cheap to implement, but in theory it should
> give less balancing within the group later an less unfairness until it
> happens.
I tried that; see 04f733b4afac5dc93ae9b0a8703c60b87def491e for why it
doesn't work.
> Rotating the cpu is probably good enough for most cases and certainly
> easier to implement.
Indeed.
> The bias continues after they first round of load balance by the other
> cpus?
The cost, yes. Even when perfectly balanced, we still get to iterate the
entire machine computing s[gd]_lb_stats to find out we're good and don't
need to move tasks about.
> Pulling everything to one cpu is not ideal from a performance point of
> view. You loose some available cpu cycles until the balance settles.
> However, it is not easy to do better and maintain scalability at the
> same time.
Right, its part of the cost we pay for scaling better. And rotating this
cost around a bit would alleviate the obvious bias.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-07 20:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-03 9:05 [PATCH 0/4] sched: remove cpu_load decay Alex Shi
2013-12-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 1/4] sched: shortcut to remove load_idx Alex Shi
2013-12-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 2/4] sched: remove rq->cpu_load[load_idx] array Alex Shi
2013-12-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 3/4] sched: clean up cpu_load update Alex Shi
2013-12-03 9:05 ` [PATCH 4/4] sched: bias to target cpu load to reduce task moving Alex Shi
2013-12-04 9:06 ` Yuanhan Liu
2013-12-04 11:25 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-17 14:10 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-12-17 15:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-19 13:34 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-20 11:19 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-12-20 14:45 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-25 14:58 ` Alex Shi
2014-01-02 16:04 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-01-06 13:35 ` Alex Shi
2014-01-07 12:55 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-01-07 12:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-07 13:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-07 13:32 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-01-07 13:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-01-07 15:16 ` Morten Rasmussen
2014-01-07 20:37 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-01-08 14:15 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-03 10:26 ` [PATCH 0/4] sched: remove cpu_load decay Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-10 1:04 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-10 1:06 ` Paul Turner
2013-12-13 19:50 ` bsegall
2013-12-14 12:53 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-13 20:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-14 13:27 ` Alex Shi
2013-12-17 14:04 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-12-17 15:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-12-17 18:12 ` Morten Rasmussen
2013-12-20 14:43 ` Alex Shi
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=20140107203752.GC2480@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@linaro.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@linaro.org \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hanjun.guo@linaro.org \
--cc=james.hogan@imgtec.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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.