From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com, len.brown@intel.com,
alan.cox@intel.com, mark.gross@intel.com, pjt@google.com,
bsegall@google.com, morten.rasmussen@arm.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, rajeev.d.muralidhar@intel.com,
vishwesh.m.rudramuni@intel.com, nicole.chalhoub@intel.com,
ajaya.durg@intel.com, harinarayanan.seshadri@intel.com,
jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/16 v3] Intercept wakeup/fork/exec load balancing
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 07:46:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140603234659.GA24315@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140603122702.GM30445@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 02:27:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 02:36:09PM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> > We intercept load balancing to contain the load and load balancing in
> > the consolidated CPUs according to our consolidating mechanism.
> >
> > In wakeup/fork/exec load balaning, when to find the idlest sched_group,
> > we first try to find the consolidated group
>
> Anything with intercept in is a complete non-starter. You still fully
> duplicate the logic.
>
> You really didn't get anything I said, did you?
>
> Please as to go back to square 1 and read again.
>
> So take a step back and try and explain what and why you're doing
> things, also try and look at what other people are doing. If I see
> another patch from you within two weeks I'll simply delete it, there's
> no way you can read up and fix everything in such a short time.
Hi Peter,
Thanks for your reply, it hurts though, :(
I was concerned about what you said back, which should be this one:
PeterZ: Fourthly, I'm _never_ going to merge anything that hijacks the load balancer
and does some random other thing. There's going to be a single load-balancer
full stop.
But some explanation to this interception/hijack. It is driven by a sched
policy (SD_WORKLOAD_CONSOLIDATION) and the resulting effect of that policy if
enabled, or still part of the load balancer. Can't do/call it that way?
Thanks,
Yuyang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-04 7:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-30 6:35 [RFC PATCH 00/16 v3] A new CPU load metric for power-efficient scheduler: CPU ConCurrency Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:35 ` [RFC PATCH 01/16 v3] Remove update_rq_runnable_avg Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:35 ` [RFC PATCH 02/16 v3] Define and initialize CPU ConCurrency in struct rq Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:35 ` [RFC PATCH 03/16 v3] How CC accrues with run queue change and time Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 04/16 v3] CPU CC update period is changeable via sysctl Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 05/16 v3] Update CPU CC in fair Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 06/16 v3] Add Workload Consolidation fields in struct sched_domain Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 07/16 v3] Init Workload Consolidation flags in sched_domain Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-09 17:56 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-06-09 21:18 ` Yuyang Du
2014-06-10 11:52 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-06-10 18:09 ` Yuyang Du
2014-06-11 9:27 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 08/16 v3] Write CPU topology info for Workload Consolidation fields " Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 09/16 v3] Define and allocate a per CPU local cpumask for Workload Consolidation Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 10/16 v3] Workload Consolidation APIs Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 11/16 v3] Make wakeup bias threshold changeable via sysctl Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 12/16 v3] Bias select wakee than waker in WAKE_AFFINE Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 13/16 v3] Intercept wakeup/fork/exec load balancing Yuyang Du
2014-06-03 12:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-03 23:46 ` Yuyang Du [this message]
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 14/16 v3] Intercept idle balancing Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 15/16 v3] Intercept periodic nohz " Yuyang Du
2014-05-30 6:36 ` [RFC PATCH 16/16 v3] Intercept periodic load balancing Yuyang Du
[not found] ` <20140609164848.GB29593@e103034-lin>
2014-06-09 21:23 ` [RFC PATCH 00/16 v3] A new CPU load metric for power-efficient scheduler: CPU ConCurrency Yuyang Du
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=20140603234659.GA24315@intel.com \
--to=yuyang.du@intel.com \
--cc=ajaya.durg@intel.com \
--cc=alan.cox@intel.com \
--cc=arjan.van.de.ven@intel.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=harinarayanan.seshadri@intel.com \
--cc=jacob.jun.pan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.gross@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
--cc=nicole.chalhoub@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=rajeev.d.muralidhar@intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vishwesh.m.rudramuni@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 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).