mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Prashanth Nageshappa <prashanth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	mingo@kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	roland@kernel.org, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: balance_cpu to consider other cpus in its group as target of (pinned) task migration
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2012 14:47:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1338814063.7356.192.camel@marge.simpson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1338810796.28282.32.camel@twins>

On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 13:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: 
> On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 11:25 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Isn't this poking the wrong spot?
> 
> Yes and no, the use-case is definitely so-so.. However, even if a FIFO
> task were to only consume 95% of time, we might still want to balance
> things differently, and I don't think we do the sane thing there either.

You need a good reason to run RT, and being able to starve others to
death ain't it, so I don't see a good reason to care about the 95% case
enough to fiddle with load balancing to accommodate the oddball case.

Agreed it is a hole, but it's one dug by root.  If you need so much CPU
that you can and will starve SCHED_OTHER to death, you need isolation
from SCHED_OTHER, lest they do evil things to your deadline, just as
much as they desperately need protection from your evil CPU usage ;-)

-Mike


  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-04 12:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-04  5:57 Prashanth Nageshappa
2012-06-04  9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 11:41   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 11:49     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 12:27       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 11:51     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04  9:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 11:53   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 12:47     ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2012-06-04 13:07       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 14:30         ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 14:38           ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 14:41             ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 15:00               ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 15:21                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 15:25                   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 15:33                     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-06-04 15:46                       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-06-04 16:56                       ` Mike Galbraith
2012-06-04 17:37                         ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri

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=1338814063.7356.192.camel@marge.simpson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=prashanth@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=roland@kernel.org \
    --cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.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