mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: torvic9@mailbox.org
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched/fair: Remove tunable scaling
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 14:51:34 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <57528692.1442403.1791809495018@app.mailbox.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDVXVzsRCUavub+6cXrC8Ke9=Vrv7A4cMcEG2WwDtJKKg@mail.gmail.com>


> Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org> hat am 12.10.2026 14:37 MESZ geschrieben:
> 
>  
> On Fri, 2 Oct 2026 at 14:45, Tor Vic <torvic9@mailbox.org> wrote:
> >
> > This series removes the scaling of tunables, which was introduced around
> > Linux 2.6.33.
> >
> > I split this into two separate patches:
> >
> > The first removes the "none" and "linear" scaling which are likely not used much
> > and have limited usefulness, as one can always set sched_base_slice through
> > debugfs.
> 
> How did you reach this conclusion? and why it's worth removing it
> 

I thought that companies would choose a specific base_slice through sysctl,
based upon their needs, but then, I'm not active in the IT segment so I might be wrong.

It's possible that there are distributions that use "none" or "linear" by default,
but I'm not aware of any.

> > It keeps the logarithmic scaling which is already the default.
> >
> > The second removes the entire scaling mecanism and sets a fixed sched_base_slice
> > of 2 milliseconds, a value which has been chosen somewhat arbitrarily.
> 
> No, the sysctl_sched_base_slice value has not been chosen arbitrarily
> and the commit you mentioned below gives you the reason

That's a misunderstanding.

I wanted to say that *I* chose the arbitrary 2 ms in this patchset, not that the
kernel's default of 0.7 ms was chosen arbitrarily.

> 
> >
> > Currently, the base_slice multiplied by the log2 factor can take the values of
> > 0.7 (1 CPU), 1.4 (2-3 CPUs), 2.1 (4-7 CPUs) and 2.8 msecs (8+ CPUs), so it seems
> > that the new value of 2 msecs is a sane default, which I also use on my consumer
> > x86_64 machines.
> > However I'll leave that open for discussion. Note that the base_slice value has
> > changed quite often over the years, lastly in 2025 [1].
> >
> > The series applies to 7.3-rc5, and is build- and boot tested on a measly 2C/4T
> > Skylake machine. I marked it as RFC because I don't know whether these changes
> > are actually wanted by the sched people - and because I'm not a developer.
> > It does however remove quite a lot of code.
> >
> > [1] commit 2ae891b826958b60919ea21c727f77bcd6ffcc2c
> >
> > Tor Vic (2):
> >   sched/fair: Remove the 'none' and 'linear' scaling of tunables
> >   sched/fair: Remove sched_base_slice scaling altogether
> >
> >  include/linux/sched/sysctl.h |  7 ----
> >  kernel/sched/core.c          |  1 -
> >  kernel/sched/debug.c         | 52 ------------------------
> >  kernel/sched/fair.c          | 79 ++----------------------------------
> >  kernel/sched/sched.h         |  5 ---
> >  5 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 141 deletions(-)
> >
> > --
> > 2.55.0
> >

      reply	other threads:[~2026-10-12 12:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-02 12:45 Tor Vic
2026-10-02 12:45 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Remove the 'none' and 'linear' scaling of tunables Tor Vic
2026-10-02 12:45 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Remove sched_base_slice scaling altogether Tor Vic
2026-10-12 12:37 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched/fair: Remove tunable scaling Vincent Guittot
2026-10-12 12:51   ` torvic9 [this message]

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=57528692.1442403.1791809495018@app.mailbox.org \
    --to=torvic9@mailbox.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    /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®