Re: [PATCH V2] sched: Improve load balancing in the presence of idle CPUs

[Jason Low]

On Fri, 2015-03-27 at 10:12 +0800, Wanpeng Li wrote:
> Hi Preeti,
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 06:32:44PM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
> >
> >1. An ILB CPU was chosen from the first numa domain to trigger nohz idle
> >load balancing [Given the experiment, upto 6 CPUs per core could be
> >potentially idle in this domain.]
> >
> >2. However the ILB CPU would call load_balance() on itself before
> >initiating nohz idle load balancing.
> >
> >3. Given cores are SMT8, the ILB CPU had enough opportunities to pull
> >tasks from its sibling cores to even out load.
> >
> >4. Now that the ILB CPU was no longer idle, it would abort nohz idle
> >load balancing
> 
> I don't see abort nohz idle load balancing when ILB CPU was no longer idle 
> in nohz_idle_balance(), could you explain more in details?

Hi Wanpeng,

In nohz_idle_balance(), there is a check for need_resched() so if the
cpu has something to run, it should exit nohz_idle_balance(), which may
cause it to not do the idle balancing on the other CPUs.



--
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/