From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753327Ab0ETLHx (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 May 2010 07:07:53 -0400 Received: from crca.org.au ([74.207.252.120]:41521 "EHLO crca.org.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752480Ab0ETLHw (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 May 2010 07:07:52 -0400 X-Bogosity: Ham, spamicity=0.000000 Message-ID: <4BF517FE.1000103@tuxonice.net> Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 21:07:42 +1000 From: Nigel Cunningham User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Suresh Siddha CC: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Arjan van de Ven , Venkatesh Pallipadi , Vaidyanathan Srinivasan , ego@in.ibm.com, LKML , Dominik Brodowski , Nigel Cunningham Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] sched: change nohz idle load balancing logic to push model References: <20100517182726.089700767@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20100517182726.089700767@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi. I finally found the time to give this patch series a try. Minor updates were required, but I'm now running it against 2.6.34. "Load balancing tick" is still number one in my powertop list of top causes of wakeups (sitting at ~60 to 80 per second as I type this, with ~170 wakeups per second total). Comparing this to the numbers I posted earlier, we seem to have a win. I do wonder, though, whether further work could still be done. If I take one core offline, for example, I'm still getting load balancing ticks. Intuitively, I'd expect there to be no need for them with only one core available. But maybe I'm just ignorant of what's going on. Regards, Nigel