linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Nick Piggin <piggin@cyberone.com.au>
Cc: colpatch@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michael Hohnbaum <hohnbaum@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [rfc][patch] kernel/sched.c oddness?
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 08:54:17 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0210030840110.4477-100000@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3D9B89FD.1060400@cyberone.com.au>


> [...] However, I noticed on my 2xSMP system that quite unbalanced loads
> weren't getting even CPU time best example - 3 processes in busywait
> loops - one would get 100% of one cpu while two would get 50% each of
> the other.

this was done intentionally, and this scenario (1+2 tasks) is the very
worst scenario. The problem is that by trying to balance all 3 tasks we
now have 3 tasks that trash their cache going from one CPU to another.  
(this is what happens with your patch - even with another approach we'd
have to trash at least one task)

By keeping 2 tasks on one CPU and 1 task on the other CPU we avoid
cross-CPU migration of threads. Think about the 2+3 or 4+5 tasks case
rather, do we want absolutely perfect balancing, or good SMP affinity and
good combined performance?

	Ingo


  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-10-03  6:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-10-02 18:41 [rfc][patch] kernel/sched.c oddness? Matthew Dobson
2002-10-03  0:06 ` Nick Piggin
2002-10-03  0:30   ` Matthew Dobson
2002-10-03  6:54   ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2002-10-03  8:32     ` Nick Piggin
2002-10-03 21:15     ` Matthew Dobson
2002-10-04  7:46       ` Ingo Molnar

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=Pine.LNX.4.44.0210030840110.4477-100000@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=colpatch@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=hohnbaum@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=piggin@cyberone.com.au \
    /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).