Re: [RFCv5 PATCH 32/46] sched: Energy-aware wake-up task placement

[Steve Muckle]

On 09/20/2015 03:03 PM, Leo Yan wrote:
> In this case of CPU is running at fmax, it's true that
> task_fits_capacity() will return true. But here i think
> cpu_overutilized() also will return true, so that means scheduler will
> go back to use CFS's old way for loading balance. Finally tasks also
> will be spread into two clusters.

Agreed that once the first cluster is overutilized, the load will
definitely spread to both clusters. My concern though is that for this
to occur, the first cluster will likely be pushed to a high OPP. For
power (and even perhaps performance) spreading the load earlier may be
better. Or not, my observation is really just that we're encoding policy
here which ideally would be the result of calculations in the energy model.
--
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/