Re: balance storm

[Mike Galbraith]

On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 11:48 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> So I suppose this is due to the select_idle_sibling() nonsense again,
> where we assumes L3 is a fair compromise between cheap enough and
> effective enough.

Nodz.

> Of course, Intel keeps growing the cpu count covered by L3 to ridiculous
> sizes, 8 cores isn't nowhere near their top silly, which shifts the
> balance, and there's always going to be pathological cases (like the
> proposed workload) where its just always going to suck eggs.

Test is as pathological as it gets.  15 core + SMT wouldn't be pretty.

-Mike

--
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/