public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Max Krasnyansky <maxk@qualcomm.com>
To: Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
	Derek Fults <dfults@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: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 13:47:15 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <492B20E3.5000900@qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081124151113.GB2292@sgi.com>

Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 04:18:29PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> Max Krasnyansky wrote:
>>> Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
>>>> Which is the way sched_load_balance is supposed to work. You need to set
>>>> sched_load_balance=0 for all cpusets containing any cpu you want to disable
>>>> balancing on, otherwise some balancing will happen.
>>> It won't be much of a balancing in this case because this just one cpu per
>>> domain.
>>> In other words no that's not how it supposed to work. There is code in
>>> cpu_attach_domain() that is supposed to remove redundant levels
>>> (sd_degenerate() stuff). There is an explicit check in there for numcpus == 1.
>>> btw The reason you got a different result that I did is because you have a
>>> NUMA box where is mine is UMA. I was able to reproduce the problem though by
>>> enabling multi-core scheduler. In which case I also get one redundant domain
>>> level CPU, with a single CPU in it.
>>> So we definitely need to fix this. I'll try to poke around tomorrow and figure
>>> out why redundant level is not dropped.
>>>
>> You were not using latest kernel, were you?
>>
>> There was a bug in sd degenerate code, and it has already been fixed:
>> 	http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/11/8/10
> 
> With the above patch added, we now see the results that Max is
> showing as far as individual root domains being created with a span
> of just their own cpu when sched_load_balance is turned off.

Nice.

Max

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-24 21:47 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
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 [this message]
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=492B20E3.5000900@qualcomm.com \
    --to=maxk@qualcomm.com \
    --cc=dfults@sgi.com \
    --cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --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