mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


  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