From: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@suse.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched: fix GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS dependency
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 18:42:42 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B190ACA.6090901@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1259928516.17907.160.camel@laptop>
On 12/04/2009 05:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 17:12 +0530, Suresh Jayaraman wrote:
>> On 12/04/2009 04:38 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2009-12-04 at 15:50 +0530, Suresh Jayaraman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I think originally introduced as a development/debugging facility,
>>>> sched_features is slowly transforming into a viable tool for System
>>>> Administrators, by looking at the impact of turning on/off some of these
>>>> features on some workloads (especially non-desktop workloads). And I
>>>> think these benefits should be passed on to the end users perhaps in the
>>>> form of documentation.
>>>
>>> This is really not meant to be used in that context. Its purely a debug
>>> feature, with knobs coming and going as we see fit.
>>>
>>
>> Does this also mean these features should not impact any specific
>> workload much?
>
> How would that follow?
>
>> http://osdir.com/ml/linux-kernel/2009-09/msg03406.html
>> In the thread above Ingo mentions about a few features and my
>> understanding is that some of these might favour one type of workload
>> than other. Is this not true anymore?
>
> Sure it is, everything is workload dependent, the posix SCHED_OTHER task
> model just doesn't include much usable information.
>
> But that does not justify promoting this to generic tunable. What if you
> happen to want to run two different workloads on one machine?
Ok, I understand.
>
> Furthermore, if your favourite workload doesn't work well, file a bug
> report (preferably with reproducer, otherwise its pure guesswork).
Make sense.
> The only reason to poke at it is debugging, full stop, no whining or .33
> won't have the interface anymore, which would be sad because then
> everybody will have to recompile their kernel to debug things.
>
The intention was to understand better (if at all there is anything
tunable, if yes document) and definitely not whining. Please don't kill it.
Thanks,
--
Suresh Jayaraman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-04 13:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-04 9:29 [RFC][PATCH] sched: fix GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS dependency Suresh Jayaraman
2009-12-04 9:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-12-04 10:20 ` Suresh Jayaraman
2009-12-04 11:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-12-04 11:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-12-04 11:42 ` Suresh Jayaraman
2009-12-04 12:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-12-04 13:12 ` Suresh Jayaraman [this message]
2009-12-04 13:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-12-04 10:06 ` Mike Galbraith
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=4B190ACA.6090901@suse.de \
--to=sjayaraman@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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