Re: [PATCH] load_balance: "busiest CPU" -> "busier CPUs"

["Siddha, Suresh B" <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>]

On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 04:38:07PM -0800, hawkes@sgi.com wrote:
> In these circumstances, an all-pinned "busiest CPU" will effectively
> disable load_balance balancing.

Solving all the load balancing issues that occur under all-pinned case is
tricy... For example, even with this patch, at a particular sched domain,
load balance might still be disabled for the cpus which belong to the same 
sched group as the all-pinned "busiest CPU"

> @@ -243,6 +243,8 @@ struct runqueue {
>  	int active_balance;
>  	int push_cpu;
>  
> +	int cpuid;			/* of this runqueue */
> +
>  	task_t *migration_thread;
>  	struct list_head migration_queue;

A simple change to find_busiest_queue() can avoid that addition to the
runqueue struct.

thanks,
suresh