From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261885AbUBHDVM (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Feb 2004 22:21:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261957AbUBHDVM (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Feb 2004 22:21:12 -0500 Received: from mail-09.iinet.net.au ([203.59.3.41]:40368 "HELO mail.iinet.net.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261885AbUBHDVK (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 Feb 2004 22:21:10 -0500 Message-ID: <4025AB00.3030601@cyberone.com.au> Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 14:20:32 +1100 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040122 Debian/1.6-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anton Blanchard CC: Rick Lindsley , "Martin J. Bligh" , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dvhltc@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Load balancing problem in 2.6.2-mm1 References: <20040207095057.GS19011@krispykreme> <200402080040.i180eY811893@owlet.beaverton.ibm.com> <20040208011221.GV19011@krispykreme> <40258F21.30209@cyberone.com.au> <20040208014141.GX19011@krispykreme> In-Reply-To: <20040208014141.GX19011@krispykreme> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Anton Blanchard wrote: >>Does active balancing still work? Ie. get two processes running on the >>same physical CPU and see if one is migrated away. >> > >Both Ricks patch and your patch still have the active rebalance issue. > >Martins patch doesnt, but that seems to be because it does absolutely no >rebalancing (all my runnable tasks are on one physical cpu) :) > > Yeah its because you have a lot of cpus, so the average is still small. You also need something like if (*imbalance == 0 && max_load - this_load > SCHED_LOAD_SCALE) *imbalance = 1; I don't have a >= 4 CPU box to test on, so I hate to be feeding you lots of little unproven patches.