From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751750AbaEBGNo (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2014 02:13:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f50.google.com ([74.125.83.50]:48827 "EHLO mail-ee0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750963AbaEBGNn (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 May 2014 02:13:43 -0400 Message-ID: <1399011219.5233.55.camel@marge.simpson.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/TEST] sched: make sync affine wakeups work From: Mike Galbraith To: Rik van Riel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, morten.rasmussen@arm.com, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, george.mccollister@gmail.com, ktkhai@parallels.com Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 08:13:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20140502004237.79dd3de6@annuminas.surriel.com> References: <20140502004237.79dd3de6@annuminas.surriel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 00:42 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > Whether or not this is the right thing to do remains to be seen, > but it does allow us to verify whether or not the wake_affine > strategy of always doing affine wakeups and only disabling them > in a specific circumstance is sound, or needs rethinking... Yes, it needs rethinking. I know why you want to try this, yes, select_idle_sibling() is very much a two faced little bitch. NOHZ doesn't help, my kernels throttle it. -Mike