Re: [patch v5 14/15] sched: power aware load balance

[Alex Shi]

On 03/30/2013 07:25 PM, Preeti U Murthy wrote:
>> > I still give the rq->util weight even the nr_running is 0, because some
>> > transitory tasks may actived on the cpu, but just missed on balancing point.
>> > 
>> > I just wondering that forgetting rq->util when nr_running = 0 is the
>> > real root cause if your finding is just on VM and without fixed VCPU to
>> > CPU pin.
> I find the same situation on a physical machine too. On a 2 socket, 4
> core machine as well. In fact, using trace_printks in the load balancing
> part, I could find that the reason that the load was not getting
> consolidated onto a socket was because the rq->util of a run-queue with
> no processes on it, had not decayed to 0, which is why it would consider
> the socket as overloaded and would  rule out power aware balancing.All
> this was on a physical machine.

Consider of this situation, we may stop account the rq->util when
nr_running is zero. Tasks will be a bit more compact. but anyway, that's
powersaving policy.

-- 
Thanks
    Alex
--
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/