Re: [Resend patch v8 0/13] use runnable load in schedule balance

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 03:56:25AM -0700, Paul Turner wrote:

> So this is actually an interesting idea, but don't think of it as
> overweight.  What "cfs_rq->blocked_load_avg / 2" means is actually
> blocked_load_avg one period from now.  This is interesting because it
> makes the (reasonable) supposition that blocked load is not about to
> immediately wake, but will continue to decay.
> 
> Could you try testing the gvr_lb_tip branch at
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pjt/sched-tip.git ?
> 
> It's an extension to your series that tries to improve some of the
> cpu_load interactions in an alternate way to the above.
> 
> It seems a little better on one and two-socket machines; but we
> couldn't reproduce/compare to your best performance results since they
> were taken on larger machines.

Oh nice.. it does away with the entire cpu_load[] array thing. Just what
Frederic needs for his NOHZ stuff as well -- he's currently abusing
LB_BIAS for that.
--
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/