From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755639AbaAHIhk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 8 Jan 2014 03:37:40 -0500
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:52208 "EHLO
	merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755050AbaAHIhe (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 8 Jan 2014 03:37:34 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 09:37:16 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@linaro.org>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Dietmar Eggemann <Dietmar.Eggemann@arm.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "mingo@kernel.org" <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "pjt@google.com" <pjt@google.com>,
        "cmetcalf@tilera.com" <cmetcalf@tilera.com>,
        "tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org>,
        "paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        "corbet@lwn.net" <corbet@lwn.net>,
        "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "len.brown@intel.com" <len.brown@intel.com>,
        "arjan@linux.intel.com" <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        "amit.kucheria@linaro.org" <amit.kucheria@linaro.org>,
        "james.hogan@imgtec.com" <james.hogan@imgtec.com>,
        "schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
        "heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] sched: CPU topology try
Message-ID: <20140108083716.GA7572@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1387372431-2644-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
 <52B87149.4010801@arm.com>
 <CAKfTPtDmb1fa8PUcrqEGaoQLxoPBddu-Yn_oS8KwsCJJWJzQug@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140106163123.GN31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAKfTPtDind8HGJwu0odSnNdRpaxp3VB3JWw3eADAp4bL4Ex-Mw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20140107132220.GZ31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20140107141059.GY3694@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20140107154154.GH2936@e103034-lin>
 <20140107204951.GD2480@laptop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <52CD0D12.6020108@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <52CD0D12.6020108@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 04:32:18PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
> In my old power aware scheduling patchset, I had tried the 95 to 99. But
> all those values will lead imbalance when we test while(1) like cases.
> like in a 24LCPUs groups, 24*5% > 1. So, finally use 100% as overload
> indicator. And in testing 100% works well to find overload since few
> system service involved. :)

Ah indeed, so 100% it is ;-)