From: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: "Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] sched: remove unnecessary sched domains
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 19:31:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050401193121.B5598@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <424DFE5F.2040804@yahoo.com.au>; from nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au on Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 12:07:27PM +1000
On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 12:07:27PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Siddha, Suresh B wrote:
> > Appended patch removes the unnecessary scheduler domains(containing
> > only one sched group) setup during the sched-domain init.
> >
> > For example on x86_64, we always have NUMA configured in. On Intel EM64T
> > systems, top most sched domain will be of NUMA and with only one sched_group in
> > it.
> >
> > With fork/exec balances(recent Nick's fixes in -mm tree), we always endup
> > taking wrong decisions because of this topmost domain (as it contains only
> > one group and find_idlest_group always returns NULL). We will endup loading
> > HT package completely first, letting active load balance kickin and correct it.
> >
> > In general, this patch also makes sense with out recent Nick's fixes
> > in -mm.
> >
>
> Yeah, this makes sense. We may want to add some other criteria on the
> removal of a domain as well (because some of the domain flags do things
> that don't use groups).
>
> I don't like so much that we'd rely on it to fix the above problem.
> There are a general class of problems with the fork/exec balancing in
> that it only works on the top most domain, so it may not spread load over
> lower domains very well.
>
> I was thinking we could fix that by running balance on fork/exec multiple
> times from top to bottom level domains. I'll have to measure the cost of
> doing that, because it may be worthwhile.
Agreed.
BTW, why are we setting SD_BALANCE_FORK flag for NUMA domain on i386, ia64.
This should be set only on x86_64 and that too not for Intel systems.
thanks,
suresh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-02 3:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-02 0:20 [Patch] sched: remove unnecessary sched domains Siddha, Suresh B
2005-04-02 2:07 ` Nick Piggin
2005-04-02 3:31 ` Siddha, Suresh B [this message]
2005-04-02 3:59 ` Nick Piggin
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=20050401193121.B5598@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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