From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: avoid overpull when pulling RT task
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 20:50:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1305658205.6238.53.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=0pe8U6TZsQcXssV3iK_5Y+jRWCA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 2011-05-17 at 22:25 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-05-16 at 21:14 +0800, Hillf Danton wrote:
> >
> >> In the following patch, pulling is played in two rounds. In the first round,
> >> the highest priority task is determined with no pull operation. Pulling is
> >> carried out in the second round, and if the highest priority task is pulled,
> >> pulling could be stopped when overload detected, to relieve overpull.
> >>
> >> Please review again, thanks.
> >
> > Traversing runqueues twice to avoid some potential task bouncing during
> > overload situation seems like a really bad trade. Not to mention that
> > between pass one and pass two, the world turns under your feet.
> >
> > You could do it in one pass by leaving the victim's runqueue locked
> > unless you find a better victim I suppose. Dunno, guess it all depends
> > on how much benefit the is to pulling only highest, which I can't answer
> > (my gut says "none, only more pain to be had here").
> >
> Hi Mike
>
> Efforts are put on the puller's side, but bad result is reached:(
Don't be discouraged by bad results, they're unavoidable. Keep on
looking, thinking and poking.
> Another patch is prepared, in which pusher is asked to do the hard works,
> say pushees and tasks are selected.
>
> Unlike puller who only concerns one runqueue that accepts the pulled tasks,
> pusher delivers tasks to more runqueues, so the overpull could get bigger.
>
> Please review again, thanks.
Sorry, but I don't have any free time atm, my cup runneth over bigtime.
Best suggestion I can offer is measure, and measure again. No theory
can compete with cold hard numbers.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-17 18:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-15 4:35 Hillf Danton
2011-05-15 6:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-05-15 11:18 ` Hillf Danton
2011-05-16 13:14 ` Hillf Danton
2011-05-16 14:11 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-05-17 14:25 ` Hillf Danton
2011-05-17 18:50 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2011-05-18 1:21 ` Steven Rostedt
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=1305658205.6238.53.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=dhillf@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yong.zhang0@gmail.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome