From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 11:08:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1363082932.14933.19.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <513E9FC6.4060507@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Does something simple like a per-task throttle of wake_affine() gain
similar benefits? Say something like only do wake_affine() once every
10 ms or so (counting on the wakee, not waker).
The rationale being that wake_affine() relies on load-balance
statistics that aren't updated that much faster, so calling it more
often than that seems pointless.
Something like that should take a lot less lines to implement.
Just wondering..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-12 10:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 7:06 [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy Michael Wang
2013-03-07 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-07 9:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 2:37 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 6:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 7:30 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 8:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-11 2:42 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 9:46 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:31 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 8:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-11 9:14 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 6:00 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-12 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 9:41 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:33 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:50 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-12 3:23 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-12 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-03-13 3:07 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-14 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-15 6:24 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-18 3:26 ` Michael Wang
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=1363082932.14933.19.camel@laptop \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.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