Re: [PATCH] 2.6.0 batch scheduling, HT aware

[Nick Piggin]

Con Kolivas wrote:

> I've done a resync and update of my batch scheduling that is also hyper-thread 
> aware.
>
> What is batch scheduling? Specifying a task as batch allows it to only use cpu 
> time if there is idle time available, rather than having a proportion of the 
> cpu time based on niceness.
>
> Why do I need hyper-thread aware batch scheduling?
>
> If you have a hyperthread (P4HT) processor and run it as two logical cpus you 
> can have a very low priority task running that can consume 50% of your 
> physical cpu's capacity no matter how high priority tasks you are running. 
> For example if you use the distributed computing client setiathome you will 
> be effectively be running at half your cpu's speed even if you run setiathome 
> at nice 20. Batch scheduling for normal cpus allows only idle time to be used 
> for batch tasks, and for HT cpus only allows idle time when both logical cpus 
> are idle.
>
> This is not being pushed for mainline kernel inclusion, but the issue of how 
> to prevent low priority tasks slowing down HT cpus needs to be considered for 
> the mainline HT scheduler if it ever gets included. This patch provides a 
> temporising measure for those with HT processors, and a demonstrative way to 
> handle them in mainline.

I wonder how does Intel suggest we handle this problem? Batch scheduling
aside, I wonder how to do any sort of priorities at all? I think POWER5
can do priorities in hardware, that is the only sane way I can think of
doing it.

I think this patch is much too ugly to get into such an elegant scheduler.
No fault to you Con because its an ugly problem.

How about this: if a task is "delta" priority points below a task running
on another sibling, move it to that sibling (so priorities via timeslice
start working). I call it active unbalancing! I might be able to make it
fit if there is interest. Other suggestions?


-
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/