From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753945AbbE0V04 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2015 17:26:56 -0400 Received: from mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.153.30]:26583 "EHLO mx0b-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752034AbbE0VYG (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2015 17:24:06 -0400 Message-ID: <556635D8.9000208@fb.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 17:23:36 -0400 From: Josef Bacik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rik van Riel , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: prefer an idle cpu vs an idle sibling for BALANCE_WAKE References: <1432675865-378571-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fb.com> <55662460.2050501@fb.com> <55663113.40407@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <55663113.40407@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [192.168.52.123] X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe X-FB-Internal: Safe X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.14.151,1.0.33,0.0.0000 definitions=2015-05-27_08:2015-05-27,2015-05-27,1970-01-01 signatures=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05/27/2015 05:03 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 05/27/2015 04:09 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: >> On 05/26/2015 05:31 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: > >>> SD_BALANCE_WAKE is supposed to find us an idle cpu to run on, however >>> it is just >>> looking for an idle sibling, preferring affinity over all else. This >>> is not >>> helpful in all cases, and SD_BALANCE_WAKE's job is to find us an idle >>> cpu, not >>> garuntee affinity. Fix this by first trying to find an idle sibling, >>> and then >>> if the cpu is not idle fall through to the logic to find an idle cpu. >>> With this >>> patch we get slightly better performance than with our forward port of >>> SD_WAKE_IDLE. Thanks, >>> >> >> I rigged up a test script to run the perf bench sched tests and give me >> the numbers. Here are the numbers >> >> 4.0 >> >> Messaging: 56.934 Total runtime in seconds >> Pipe: 105620.762 ops/sec >> >> 4.0 + my patch >> >> Messaging: 47.374 >> Pipe: 113691.199 > > I did not get the email with your original patch, > either to my inbox or my lkml folder, but I saw the > patch on pastebin, and it looks good. > > When you resend it, please feel free to add my > > Acked-by: Rik van Riel > > Assuming the version you meant to email yesterday was > the same one that you showed me on pastebin, of course :) > Ha yes it's the same, sorry I'm not sure what happened, I've resent it again from a different machine, let me know if you don't get the new one and I'll just send it from thunderbird. Thanks, Josef