Re: Missing recalculation of scheduler tunables in case of cpu hotadd/remove

[Christian Ehrhardt]

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 17:25 +0100, Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
>   
> > > Aside from that, we probably should put an upper limit in place, as I
> > > guess large cpu count machines get silly large values
> > >       
> > I agree to that, but in the code is already an upper limit of 
> > 200.000.000 - well we might discuss if that is too low/high.
> >     
>
> Yeah, I think we should cap it around the 8-16 CPUs.
>
>   
ok for me, driven by that finding I think I have to measure different 
kind of scalings anyway, but as usually that takes some time :-/
At least too time much for the discussion & solution of that bug I guess.

The question for now is what we do on cpu hot add/remove?
Would hooking somewhere in kernel/cpu.c be the right approach - I'm not 
quite sure about my own suggestion yet :-).

--

GrÃsse / regards, Christian Ehrhardt
IBM Linux Technology Center, Open Virtualization 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/