From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Prashanth Nageshappa <prashanth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
mingo@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
roland@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: balance_cpu to consider other cpus in its group as target of (pinned) task migration
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 20:30:40 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120604150040.GD25126@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1338820895.7356.252.camel@marge.simpson.net>
* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> [2012-06-04 16:41:35]:
> But high priority SCHED_OTHER tasks do not hog the CPU, they get their
> fair share as defined by the user.
Consider this case. System with 2 cores (each with 2 thread) and 3
cgroups :
A (1024) -> has 2 tasks (A0, A1)
B (2048) -> has 2 tasks (B0, B1)
C (1024) -> has 1 tasks (C0 - pinned to CPUs 1,2)
(B0, B1) collectively are eligible to consume 2 full cpus worth of
bandwidth, (A0, A1) together are eligible to consume 1 full-cpu
worth of bandwidth and finally C0 is eligible to get 1 full-cpu worth of
bandwidth.
Currently C0 is sleeping as a result of which tasks could be spread as:
CPU0 -> A0
CPU1 -> A1
CPU2 -> B0
CPU3 -> B1
Now C0 wakes up and lands on CPU2 (which was its prev_cpu).
CPU0 -> A0
CPU1 -> A1
CPU2 -> B0, C0
CPU3 -> B1
Ideally CPU1 needs to pull it C0 to itself (while A1 moves to CPU0). Do
you agree to that? I doubt that happens because of how CPU0 does load
balance on behalf of itself and CPU1 (and thus fails to pull C0 to its
core).
- vatsa
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-04 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-04 5:57 [PATCH] sched: balance_cpu to consider other cpus in its group as target of (pinned) task migration Prashanth Nageshappa
2012-06-04 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 11:41 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 12:27 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 11:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 9:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 12:47 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 13:07 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 14:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 14:38 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 14:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 15:00 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri [this message]
2012-06-04 15:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 15:25 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 15:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 15:46 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 16:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 17:37 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
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=20120604150040.GD25126@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=prashanth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=roland@kernel.org \
/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