Re: [RFC PATCH v3 0/3] sched: simplify the select_task_rq_fair()

[Michael Wang]

On 02/20/2013 09:32 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 11:49 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
>> The changes look clean and reasoable, 
> 
> I don't necessarily agree, note that O(n^2) storage requirement that
> Michael failed to highlight ;-)

Forgive me for not explain this point in cover, but it's really not a
big deal in my opinion...

And I'm going to apply Mike's suggestion, do allocation when cpu active,
that will save some space :)

Regards,
Michael Wang

> 
>> any ideas exactly *why* it speeds up?
> 
> That is indeed the most interesting part.. There's two parts to
> select_task_rq_fair(), the 'regular' affine wakeup path, and the
> fork/exec find_idlest_goo() path. At the very least we need to quantify
> which of these two parts contributes most to the speedup.
> 
> In the power balancing discussion we already noted that the
> find_idlest_goo() is in need of attention.
> 
> --
> 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/
> 

--
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/