From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: riel@redhat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vincent.guittot@linaro.org,
mikey@neuling.org, mingo@kernel.org, jhladky@redhat.com,
ktkhai@parallels.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
nicolas.pitre@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched: fix and clean up calculate_imbalance
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 16:53:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140729145308.GV12054@laptop.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140729144952.GG3935@laptop>
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 04:49:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -6247,32 +6247,15 @@ static inline void calculate_imbalance(struct lb_env *env, struct sd_lb_stats *s
> > return fix_small_imbalance(env, sds);
> > }
> >
> > - if (!busiest->group_imb) {
> > - /*
> > - * Don't want to pull so many tasks that a group would go idle.
> > - * Except of course for the group_imb case, since then we might
> > - * have to drop below capacity to reach cpu-load equilibrium.
> > - */
> > - load_above_capacity =
> > - (busiest->sum_nr_running - busiest->group_capacity_factor);
> > -
> > - load_above_capacity *= (SCHED_LOAD_SCALE * SCHED_CAPACITY_SCALE);
> > - load_above_capacity /= busiest->group_capacity;
> > - }
>
> I think we want to retain that, esp. for the overloaded case. So that
> wants to be:
>
> if (busiest->sum_nr_running > busiest->group_capacity_factor)
>
> Clearly it doesn't make sense for the !overload case, and we explicitly
> want to avoid it in the imb case.
Ah, wait, I think I see why you want that gone. I was only expecting a
correction fix wrt changing pick_busiest(), not also behaviour changes.
Lemme reconsider.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-29 14:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-28 18:16 [PATCH 0/2] load balancing fixes riel
2014-07-28 18:16 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: fix and clean up calculate_imbalance riel
2014-07-29 9:04 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-29 14:53 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-29 15:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-29 15:39 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-29 14:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 15:15 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-29 15:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 17:04 ` Rik van Riel
2014-07-29 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-30 9:32 ` Vincent Guittot
2014-07-30 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-12 14:52 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Allow calculate_imbalance() to move idle cpus tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 14:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched: fix and clean up calculate_imbalance Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-29 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-07-29 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-12 14:52 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Make calculate_imbalance() independent tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2014-07-28 18:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched: make update_sd_pick_busiest return true on a busier sd riel
2014-07-29 15:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-12 14:52 ` [tip:sched/core] sched/fair: Make update_sd_pick_busiest() return 'true' " tip-bot for Rik van Riel
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=20140729145308.GV12054@laptop.lan \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jhladky@redhat.com \
--cc=ktkhai@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.pitre@linaro.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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