linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com (Preeti U Murthy)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/13] sched: Integrating Per-entity-load-tracking with the core scheduler
Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 09:06:07 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <508B56A7.1010501@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121026130715.GB9886@gmail.com>

On 10/26/2012 06:37 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> 
>> [...]
>>
>> So a sane series would introduce maybe two functions: 
>> cpu_load() and task_load() and use those where we now use 
>> rq->load.weight and p->se.load.weight for load balancing 
>> purposes. Implement these functions using those two 
>> expression. So effectively this patch is a NOP.
>>
>> Secondly, switch these two functions over to the per-task 
>> based averages.
>>
>> Tada! all done. The load balancer will then try and equalize 
>> effective load instead of instant load.
>>
>> It will do the 3x10% vs 100% thing correctly with just those 
>> two patches. Simply because it will report a lower cpu-load 
>> for the 3x10% case than it will for the 100% case, no need to 
>> go fudge about in the load-balance internals.
>>
>> Once you've got this correctly done, you can go change 
>> balancing to better utilize the new metric, like use the 
>> effective load instead of nr_running against the capacity and 
>> things like that. But for every such change you want to be 
>> very careful and run all the benchmarks you can find -- in 
>> fact you want to do that after the 2nd patch too.
> 
> If anyone posted that simple two-patch series that switches over 
> to the new load metrics I'd be happy to test the performance of 
> those.
> 
> Having two parallel load metrics is really not something that we 
> should tolerate for too long.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo
> 
Right Ingo.I will incorporate this approach and post out very soon.

Thank you

Regards
Preeti

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-27  3:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-25 10:24 [RFC PATCH 00/13] sched: Integrating Per-entity-load-tracking with the core scheduler Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:24 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] sched:Prevent movement of short running tasks during load balancing Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] sched:Pick the apt busy sched group " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] sched:Decide whether there be transfer of loads based on the PJT's metric Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] sched:Decide group_imb using " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] sched:Calculate imbalance " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] sched: Changing find_busiest_queue to use " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] sched: Change move_tasks " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] sched: Some miscallaneous changes in load_balance Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:25 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] sched: Modify check_asym_packing to use PJT's metric Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:26 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] sched: Modify fix_small_imbalance " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:26 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] sched: Modify find_idlest_group " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:26 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] sched: Modify find_idlest_cpu " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:26 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] sched: Modifying wake_affine " Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 10:33 ` [RFC PATCH 00/13] sched: Integrating Per-entity-load-tracking with the core scheduler Preeti Murthy
2012-10-25 15:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-25 18:00   ` Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-25 18:12   ` Preeti U Murthy
2012-10-26 12:29     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-26 13:07       ` Ingo Molnar
2012-10-27  3:36         ` Preeti U Murthy [this message]
2012-10-27  3:33       ` Preeti U Murthy

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=508B56A7.1010501@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).