public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [BUG] idle_balance() does not call load_balance_newidle()
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2008 13:52:11 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081209082211.GA29340@dirshya.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081209063448.GA17706@elte.hu>

* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> [2008-12-09 07:34:48]:

> 
> * Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> 
> > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> [2008-12-08 16:49:39]:
> > 
> > > 
> > > * Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > load_balance_newidle() does not get called if SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE is
> > > > set at higher level domain (3-CPU) and not in low level domain (2-MC).
> > > > 
> > > > pulled_task is initialised to -1 and checked for non-zero which is
> > > > always true if the lowest level sched_domain does not have
> > > > SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE flag set.
> > > > 
> > > > Trivial fix to initialise pulled_task to zero.
> > > > Patch against 2.6.28-rc7
> > > 
> > > applied to tip/sched/core, thanks! (Not for v2.6.28 because this could 
> > > affect performance.)
> > 
> > Thanks Ingo.  This patch does not change any functionality in v2.6.28 
> > and hence will not affect performance.  The SD flags are not touched. I 
> > found this bug while setting different SD flags at MC level and CPU 
> > level in my power saving balance patches.
> 
> if it does not change any functionality then we would not be doing the 
> change, right?
 
 :) 
  
> It does change functionality, because:
> 
> > > > load_balance_newidle() does not get called if SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE is 
> > > > set at higher level domain (3-CPU) and not in low level domain 
> > > > (2-MC).
> 
> even though it's a bug fix, it affects how the SD flags are interpreted 
> and acted upon by the load balancer - i.e. the change can impact 
> performance.

Agreed.  In my test setup with two levels of sched_domains,
SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE has not been set in both CPU level and MC level
starting from 2.6.28-rc4.  In a setup with more levels of
sched_domains and if the higher levels have SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE set,
then we will have a functional impact.  

You are right in queueing it for 2.6.29.

Thanks for the clarification.

--Vaidy


      reply	other threads:[~2008-12-09  8:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-08 15:22 [BUG] idle_balance() does not call load_balance_newidle() Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-08 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-08 15:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-09  4:07   ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-09  6:34     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-09  8:22       ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan [this message]

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=20081209082211.GA29340@dirshya.in.ibm.com \
    --to=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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