Re: [RESEND PATCH V5 0/8] remove cpu_load idx

From: Alex Shi
Date: Fri May 09 2014 - 12:41:36 EST



ä 5/6/14, 19:43, Peter Zijlstra åé:
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 04:33:38PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
Maybe the predication is reasonable on per task history. but on a cpu
load history, with many tasks rebalance. No testing show current method
is helpful.

For task load change, scheduler has no idea for its future except guess
from its history. but for cpu load change, scheduler know this from task
wakeup and balance, which both under control and its aim.


I think the first patch of this serial has the same effect of LB_LIAS
disable. and previous result show performance is good.

Anyway, I just pushed the following patch to github, maybe fengguang's
testing system will care this.
Fengguang,

Are there any performance change on
https://github.com/alexshi/power-scheduling.git noload repository?
You forgot to qualify that with the important bit; on _large_ systems.
Esp. non fully connected numa boxen. Also, I'm not sure Wu has workloads
that are typical of such systems -- even if he has such machines, which
I don't know either.

Fengguang,
Why not introduce your machines and workloads to US? It is a good chance to sell your system. :)

Enterprise distro testing has _some_ of that, but the very sad truth is
that most enterprise users lag behind at least a full release cycle. So
by the time people start using the kernel, its so old nobody really
cares anymore :-(
It sounds so bad.
Does redhat like to take some action for this? You have big impact to Linux community!

and what's your plan for this patch set?
It remove much of tick precess, and performance looks good as far as testing. :)




--
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/