From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
Cc: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 11:49:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49246DD0.3010509@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4910634C.1020207@novell.com>
Gregory Haskins wrote:
> If you tried creating different cpusets and it still had them all end up
> in the def_root_domain, something is very broken indeed. I will take a
> look.
I beleive that's the intended behaviour. We always put cpus that are not
balanced into null sched domains. This was done since day one (ie when
cpuisol= option was introduced) and cpusets just followed the same convention.
I think the idea is that we want to make balancer a noop on those processors.
We could change cpusets code to create a root sched domain for each cpu I
guess. But can we maybe scale cpupri some other way ?
Max
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-19 19:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-03 21:07 RT sched: cpupri_vec lock contention with def_root_domain and no load balance Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-03 22:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-04 1:29 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-04 3:53 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-04 14:34 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-04 14:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-04 14:40 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-04 14:59 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-19 19:49 ` Max Krasnyansky [this message]
2008-11-19 19:55 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-19 20:17 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-19 20:21 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-19 20:25 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-19 20:33 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-19 21:30 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-19 21:47 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-19 22:25 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-20 2:12 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-21 1:57 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-11-21 20:04 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-21 21:18 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-22 7:03 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-22 8:18 ` Li Zefan
2008-11-24 15:11 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-24 21:47 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-24 21:46 ` Max Krasnyansky
2008-11-04 14:45 ` Dimitri Sivanich
2008-11-06 9:13 ` Nish Aravamudan
2008-11-06 13:32 ` Dimitri Sivanich
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=49246DD0.3010509@qualcomm.com \
--to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
/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