From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262088AbVFHDuq (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 23:50:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262089AbVFHDuq (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 23:50:46 -0400 Received: from smtp207.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.129.97]:63580 "HELO smtp207.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262088AbVFHDug (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2005 23:50:36 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc6-mm1 From: Nick Piggin To: Con Kolivas Cc: Andrew Morton , Christoph Lameter , mbligh@mbligh.org, lkml In-Reply-To: <200506081333.18511.kernel@kolivas.org> References: <1004450000.1118188239@flay> <20050607170853.3f81007a.akpm@osdl.org> <1118200638.10122.6.camel@npiggin-nld.site> <200506081333.18511.kernel@kolivas.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2005 13:50:28 +1000 Message-Id: <1118202628.10122.24.camel@npiggin-nld.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 13:33 +1000, Con Kolivas wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jun 2005 01:17 pm, Nick Piggin wrote: > > To start with, it looks like the smp-nice patches are broken. Even if > > they weren't I think it might be a good idea just to put them on hold > > until we work out what to do with the other sched patches... > > I originally said I'd wait till the sched patches settled down before tackling > it but it didn't look like that was ever going to happen and broken nice on > SMP is a real bug biting people now so I figured I should just tackle it > anyway. I don't mind if we just work on it later though. > Well I agree with you that it would be nice to fix it. I think your approach has good potential, and it is along the same lines as what I had in mind. > > Anyway, Con, this is what it is doing on a 64-way Altix running aim7: > > (compare imbalances, task move rates, wakeup move rates, etc). > > Definitely different I agree. As for the performance impact the statistics > alone don't tell us if they're for good or evil, but we can look at it again > separately when we tackle smp nice again. It is a real issue for users now, > though so it would be good if we can have a calmer period in the future to do > this (smp nice) by itself. > True. Fortunately this seems to only come up once a year or so. Although I guess with the rise and rise of multi threaded and multi cored CPUs it could become a bigger issue. > These are the four patches Andrew: > sched-implement-nice-support-across-physical-cpus-on-smp.patch > sched-change_prio_bias_only_if_queued.patch > sched-account_rt_tasks_in_prio_bias.patch > sched-smp-nice-bias-busy-queues-on-idle-rebalance.patch > Thanks. > The other HT patch by me is separate and a bugfix so please leave that in. > Yep. Nick -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com