Re: [DISCUSSION] removing variety rq->cpu_load ?

[Michael Wang]

Hi, Alex

On 06/04/2013 09:51 AM, Alex Shi wrote:
> resend with a new subject.

Forgive me but I'm a little lost on this thread...

So we are planing to rely on instant 'cpu_load[0]' and decayed
'runnable_load_avg' only, do we?

Regards,
Michael Wang

> 
>> Peter,
>>
>> I just tried to remove the variety rq.cpu_load, by the following patch. 
>> Because forkexec_idx and busy_idx are all zero, after the patch system just keep cpu_load[0]
>> and remove other values.
>> I tried the patch base 3.10-rc3 and latest tip/sched/core with benchmark dbench,tbench,
>> aim7,hackbench. and oltp of sysbench. Seems performance doesn't change clear.
>> So, for my tested machines, core2, NHM, SNB, with 2 or 4 CPU sockets, and above tested
>> benchmark. We are fine to remove the variety cpu_load. 
>> Don't know if there some other concerns on other scenarios.
>>
>> ---
>> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> index 590d535..f0ca983 100644
>> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
>> @@ -4626,7 +4626,7 @@ static inline void update_sd_lb_stats(struct lb_env *env,
>>         if (child && child->flags & SD_PREFER_SIBLING)
>>                 prefer_sibling = 1;
>>  
>> -       load_idx = get_sd_load_idx(env->sd, env->idle);
>> +       load_idx = 0; //get_sd_load_idx(env->sd, env->idle);
>>  
>>         do {
>>                 int local_group;
>>
>>
> 
> 

--
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/