mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: some recent scheduler patches
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 19:53:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091202185328.GI31517@wotan.suse.de> (raw)

Hi,

I'm just been looking through some of the recent scheduler patches
while bisecting something...

83f54960c11a14942ab00b54c51e91906b9d8235: sched: for_each_domain() vs RCU
I don't see what is the step that causes FAIL? sched-domains code is
using synchronize_sched(), so that part should be safe.

And b8a543ea5a5896830a9969bacfd047f9d15940b2... This changelog is not
correct to start with. The _idx stuff does not just shift the time
that balancing decisions are made, it damps balancing choices to be
more conservative if they might have been wrong over more than a single
instant sample.

And secondly there is no reason give for the change. Ditto for a lot of
other tuning changes really. Not that there was always exact reasons
for every single one of the defaults I found, but they a) always tried
to get reasonable performance with as conservative balancing as
possible (ie. so 2 different tunings with no distinguishable difference
then tuning that result in fewer task movements would be preferred).
And b) they were relatively well tested.

Are people really not reporting enough regressions against CFS that it
is time to just tweak things?


             reply	other threads:[~2009-12-02 18:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-12-02 18:53 Nick Piggin [this message]
2009-12-02 19:04 ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20091202185328.GI31517@wotan.suse.de \
    --to=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®