Re: [PATCH] Load balancing problem in 2.6.2-mm1

Nick Piggin
2004-02-08T01:23:27Z

Anton Blanchard wrote:

>
>Hi,
>
>
>>The current imbalance code rounds up to 1, meaning that we'll often
>>see an "imbalance" of 1 even when it's 1 to 0 and just been moved.
>>Did you see these results even with Martin's patch to not round up to 1?
>>
>
>Indeed Martins patch does fix the problem:
>
>cpu user system idle cpu user system idle
>cpu0 0 0 100 cpu1 0 0 100
>cpu2 0 0 100 cpu3 0 0 100
>cpu4 0 0 100 cpu5 0 0 100
>cpu6 0 0 100 cpu7 0 0 100
>cpu8 0 0 100 cpu9 0 0 100
>cpu10 0 0 100 cpu11 0 0 100
>cpu12 0 0 100 cpu13 100 0 0
>cpu14 0 0 100 cpu15 0 0 100
>
>My current tree has your patch and Martins patch. So far its looking
>good.
>
>

Rick's being the one I sent you?

Does active balancing still work? Ie. get two processes running on the
same physical CPU and see if one is migrated away.