From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DEBC433F5 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 15:29:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236123AbiBXP3v (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:29:51 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54678 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232343AbiBXP3t (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:29:49 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-x22a.google.com (mail-lj1-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 724091BA14C for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 07:29:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x22a.google.com with SMTP id bn33so3408864ljb.6 for ; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 07:29:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=EMjz3GUKEught2ePjPyclv4KwRdqwfnECAei6dKW3vI=; b=gFftsX0zxW/J0elk0M3ECgZKjVXIIbavU/YePdhRXkpMslH4BYQQSm30MsSEwKkW+e 5AM+QDI2cWeD6mu8dLlaGyL/YBEHISsTs16zDwC2BeOsfXMmL2JvRzaY8+vbjTvQ8HDV g+Yrl5r0cxVFAbHOZ4ReZzoUOeEb54kGl81MzFf7F+yykMW1xmJ49UvdySchA++r9WUt 96bluTYY7CZGYQ24S+YJ3CxFuDpopexF88tihcK/fa8VIH8qSoYCAQ0kNvbZjWFOvlWi L2Rx2mXxDcF7a2gyCPz5fr8xPq6yRfMZGortCGXJUfVlWtY17nNRu+lRpHLH/NjvkxDh zVHw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=EMjz3GUKEught2ePjPyclv4KwRdqwfnECAei6dKW3vI=; b=6iZTRTgWV2YHM0pRxDD7/vmGNI+DM+d8OI7QqBLkY+Tk9Hw0v0fRuLHSaUR4RfbiX1 J3idj/BiPnWOq+Tvn0tMz2H+HSGoyYCLE0dt/tsVt6eHLaZ01bwKM7mL82avgjbGKSD8 CXBX6fkfUONVQddj/w7n/69tyAVxJ28BNW1SvA7Bcqf1E1QWGiMqMxGQAMToNmCCAZhr BoXaeOUnJ9yaMi6iRe4zSJMk5ugWSdOhKAd4RNlm7gfBKT58tENagUg5hkyoV5XuYFJl vzvSZa9/rhHZiKVsueDaZvqBFKElIcly/SkxtnJGmocQZCavrDB/EFCv/eufz6whWMQz AF3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iLNScUGhkQJCcKLnvy4qh751wvVcnJLagTn7H8wnNOTgifqIM X8uVqJqTMs6+UdMu0ur/s9XZvBr6lDMEZ23i9Eix8Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyWNQWbKWSU29Xq+LUBZEvcQ2vCZFTH7TFlscZZvLsZwNfmFaJFGMKhd8U6YLb+3JT8tZqkBY/Zm0ZC2XFig0E= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a905:0:b0:246:609b:881e with SMTP id j5-20020a2ea905000000b00246609b881emr2202891ljq.383.1645716557754; Thu, 24 Feb 2022 07:29:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220217154403.6497-1-wuyun.abel@bytedance.com> In-Reply-To: From: Vincent Guittot Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 16:29:06 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] introduce sched-idle balancing To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Abel Wu , Ben Segall , Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , Dietmar Eggemann , Ingo Molnar , Juri Lelli , Mel Gorman , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 at 16:20, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 11:43:56PM +0800, Abel Wu wrote: > > Current load balancing is mainly based on cpu capacity > > and task util, which makes sense in the POV of overall > > throughput. While there still might be some improvement > > can be done by reducing number of overloaded cfs rqs if > > sched-idle or idle rq exists. > > I'm much confused, there is an explicit new-idle balancer and a periodic > idle balancer already there. I agree, You failed to explain why newly_idle and periodic idle load balance are not enough and we need this new one