RE: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups, sched-2.6.5-rc2-mm2-A3

From: Nakajima, Jun
Date: Thu Mar 25 2004 - 10:34:17 EST


Can you be more specific with "it doesn't load balance threads
aggressively enough"? Or what behavior of the base NUMA scheduler is
missing in the sched-domain scheduler especially for NUMA?


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andi Kleen [mailto:ak@xxxxxxx]
>Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 3:47 AM
>To: Rick Lindsley
>Cc: Andi Kleen; Ingo Molnar; piggin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
>kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; akpm@xxxxxxxx; kernel@xxxxxxxxxxx;
>rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Nakajima, Jun; anton@xxxxxxxxx; lse-
>tech@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; mbligh@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Lse-tech] [patch] sched-domain cleanups,
>On Thu, Mar 25, 2004 at 03:40:22AM -0800, Rick Lindsley wrote:
>> The main problem it has is that it performs quite badly on
>> e.g. in the OpenMP STREAM test (much worse than the normal
>> Andi, I've got some schedstat code which may help us to understand
>> I'll need to port it to Ingo's changes, but if I drop you a patch in
>> day or two can you try your test on sched-domain/non-sched-domain,
>> collecting the stats?
>The openmp failure is already pretty well understood - it doesn't load
>threads aggressively enough over CPUs after startup.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at