From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751203AbdH0HRW convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Sun, 27 Aug 2017 03:17:22 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]:52682 "EHLO mout.gmx.net"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750792AbdH0HRV (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sun, 27 Aug 2017 03:17:21 -0400
Message-ID: <1503818196.7566.82.camel@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT] sched/fair: Improve the behavior of sync flag
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>,
        Juri Lelli <Juri.Lelli@arm.com>,
        Brendan Jackman <brendan.jackman@arm.com>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2017 09:16:36 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAJWu+orjvXBgAYnpnn-9xoYW53+cB7g4yeK5-9dw8aAaJKCHOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20170827010226.19703-1-joelaf@google.com>
         <1503812659.7566.43.camel@gmx.de> <1503814090.7566.50.camel@gmx.de>
         <CAJWu+orjvXBgAYnpnn-9xoYW53+cB7g4yeK5-9dw8aAaJKCHOg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.20.5 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:QPRb8vi4O8hztuuZHVZoYkCj1BD7BpmgrAc/xPiVYZ/DkohqGNA
 bglhim2kxF2i9/zBa0zlwwN0YoDMD2Jz0i49fzEhX5/H7YsPeQZuP1ilLSba8RyRZEpuOxx
 JcPn0pQ7Ypdz6eUDtIITXTCQluliCD43+vRn13k5ojS2Jzgas9MXQzj5Xh55BO3H7hP1WqD
 SjXo0pGe7XVQP9t5QA9zQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:RgI+72EMt0M=:FFzTQAc7pBsmHGaSkD1kuu
 2iGCgi/4Mit58EqBEfPNP3ce5A2SnSlTdl4nJci9Yzbf4rCtxP9v8BpEkhZ8+Vngbu4VWkOy5
 gfytqs5I0vB2n85EJwk+PZ1BXdL8lDYRupVrwjO06TQ9NlXXitNPMtY6IpTXAl9iZva31cscO
 8fpRZwSJhK4epx93+QSYoRcllcR/ALDw/g50vIeLWAW08d6kX+smf3lreAH+LBpjx9REFXAqQ
 /etGgqN9N9a/tBZmBadZWkyT9ey726qocLDh8BE0OwrkZ2S1z31NLvFimnvDqNSHX7b7n42jl
 A44b7iyoGyac70UpKOujcpnhx2HBUUoAwV0hyGxljBYFIGwALkkSY1ebg+nrn+c63XuTdWis+
 lYLaJjZU6ZT6XITYHHcvukZfe6DSNyHBTEYpeXGjHdZ5hwfIX9bRguAFKcrzDcRC4dvst6StT
 mxTx/Iafuybk8TpQT6vqZpqXk/r7cF+TLv0UwvSXeu4/+oCpnSgyb0/RcZxlxLG1HVPjjFdJ0
 qb5bFnclQ6G2EhCYtSo8ZDM8FXafFHfcwUwGQUHguVUtrY4EKIziTKqZWxm/cIuK4TNbI20QQ
 th7z2ySsvM57x8dmIjWQJpbO2sg2TR4oqJRAWd9pP10tGHBYXO/ijnOAjYnHOEQQYcqTaclfD
 oDqH2peGqJccZC1mpxo/eEpKQgSo5apIK+OVKg3iDDlrqqg3Vs1l1X74kH9l4nZQCJG7BIol0
 I8ekWohLgJX3ERuyvxKrN5fl+KKfi34q8xRyL1nGS4CdoLLO35gamtpYkKdtg18WhBhPM606t
 6/AOEe39rD8jNMqsUP2NU+opyZoVc498JR6YLngRnbUyD+9M34=
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sat, 2017-08-26 at 23:39 -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> 
> > P.S. to get the most bang for your synchronous buck, you want a
> > preemptive wakeup.. but that butts heads with the fair engine.
> >
> 
> By preemptive wake up I guess you mean the waker would give up its
> time slice and let the wakee use it? That's a cool idea but I agree it
> would be against the fair task behavior.

No, I meant a preemption, that being the cheapest switch.  Any mucking
about with vruntime is a non-starter (NAK bait), making guaranteed
preemption a non-starter.

	-Mike