linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Theurer <habanero@us.ibm.com>
To: Erich Focht <efocht@hpce.nec.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>, mingo@elte.hu
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	LSE <lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>,
	torvalds@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2.6.0t4] 1 cpu/node scheduler fix
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:54:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308251054.36216.habanero@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200308241913.24699.efocht@hpce.nec.com>

> This simple patch is not meant as opposition to Andrew's attempt to
> NUMAize the whole scheduler. That one will definitely make NUMA
> coders' lives easier but I fear that it is a bit too complex for
> 2.6. 

I would agree, it's probably too much to change this late in 2.6.  Eventually 
(2.7) I think we should revisit this and try for a more unified approach.  

> The attached small incremental change is sufficient to solve the
> main problem. Besides, the change of the cross-node scheduling is
> compatible with Andrew's scheduler structure. I really don't like the
> timer-based cross-node balancing because it is too unflexible (no way
> to have different balancing intervals for each node) and I'd really
> like to get back to just one single point of entry for load balancing:
> the routine load_balance(), no matter whether we balance inside a
> timer interrupt or while the CPU is going idle.

Looks good to me.  One other thing your patch fixes:  Once in a while we 
called load_balance in rebalance_tick with the wrong 'idle' value.  
Occasionally we would be on an idle_node and idle_cpu rebalance tick, the 
idle cpu would [possibly] pull a task, become non-idle, then we would call 
load_balance again, but still have idle=1 for the intranode balance.  


  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-08-25 15:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-08-24 17:13 [patch 2.6.0t4] 1 cpu/node scheduler fix Erich Focht
2003-08-25  8:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2003-09-02 10:57   ` Erich Focht
2003-08-25 15:54 ` Andrew Theurer [this message]
2003-08-25 17:38 ` Martin J. Bligh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200308251054.36216.habanero@us.ibm.com \
    --to=habanero@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=ak@muc.de \
    --cc=efocht@hpce.nec.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=mbligh@aracnet.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).