All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
	Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not decay new task load on first enqueue
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 21:16:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161004201607.GQ16071@codeblueprint.co.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtC9d8iE_jAJ9-bej886imqN2WNjsqGPP3t-CVAtiyxC-Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 28 Sep, at 04:46:06AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> 
> ok so i'm a bit confused there
> my understand of your explanation above  is that now we left a small
> amount of load in runnable_load_avg after the dequeue so another cpu
> will be chosen. But this explanation seems to be the opposite of what
> Matt said in a previous email that:
> "The performance drop comes from the fact that enqueueing/dequeueing a
> task with load 1002 during fork() results in a zero runnable_load_avg,
> which signals to the load balancer that the CPU is idle, so the next
> time we fork() we'll pick the same CPU to enqueue on -- and the cycle
> continues."

Right, we want to avoid the performance drop, which we can do by
leaving a small amount of load in runnable_load_avg. I think Dietmar
and me are saying the same thing.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-10-04 20:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-09-23 11:58 [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not decay new task load on first enqueue Matt Fleming
2016-09-23 14:30 ` Vincent Guittot
2016-09-27 13:48   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-09-27 19:24     ` Matt Fleming
2016-09-27 19:21   ` Matt Fleming
2016-09-28 10:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 11:06   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-09-28 11:19     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-28 11:31       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-09-28 11:46         ` Vincent Guittot
2016-09-28 12:00           ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-04 21:25             ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-04 20:16           ` Matt Fleming [this message]
2016-09-28 12:27         ` Vincent Guittot
2016-09-28 13:13           ` Vincent Guittot
2016-09-29 16:15             ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-10-03 13:05               ` Vincent Guittot
2016-09-28 17:59       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-09-28 19:37   ` Matt Fleming
2016-09-30 20:30     ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-09  3:39     ` Wanpeng Li
2016-10-10 10:01       ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-10 10:09         ` Wanpeng Li
2016-10-11 10:27           ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-10 12:29         ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-10 13:54           ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-10-10 18:29             ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-11  9:44               ` Dietmar Eggemann
2016-10-11 10:39                 ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-18 10:11                   ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-10 17:34           ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-11 10:24             ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-11 13:14               ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-11 18:57                 ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-12  7:41                   ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-18 11:09                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-18 15:19                       ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-18 10:29               ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-18 11:10                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-18 11:29                   ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-18 12:15                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-19  6:38                       ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-19  9:53                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-11-09 16:53                           ` Vincent Guittot
2016-10-04 20:11   ` Matt Fleming
2016-10-09  5:57 ` [sched/fair] f54c5d4e28: hackbench.throughput 10.6% improvement kernel test robot
2016-10-09  5:57   ` [lkp] " kernel test robot

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=20161004201607.GQ16071@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --to=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=yuyang.du@intel.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.