From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Preeti U Murthy <preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Get rid of unnecessary checks from select_idle_sibling
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 14:49:01 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obgxpoz6.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50ED286C.6070601@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (Preeti U. Murthy's message of "Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530")
Hi Preeti,
On Wed, 09 Jan 2013 13:51:00 +0530, Preeti U. Murthy wrote:
> On 01/09/2013 12:20 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>
>>
>> AFAICS @target cpu of select_idle_sibling() is always either prev_cpu
>> or this_cpu. So no need to check it again and the conditionals can be
>> consolidated.
[snip]
> If NUMA_TTWU_BIAS or NUMA_TTWU_TO is true(it is false by
I can't find those bits in the code. I've checked v3.8-rc2,
next-20130110, tip/master and tip/numa/core but there's nothing like
above. Which tree are you saying?
> default),cpu/prev_cpu can be changed to be a random node_cpu(the node
> that 'this_cpu' is on). In which case even if the node cpu is idle,it
> would not be a viable target,looks like.Maybe that is why
> select_idle_sibling() makes the check if the target is prev_cpu/this cpu.
Looking into tip/numa/core, I can see that there's a code added for
CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING. But still, it seems nothing changed on a path
from select_task_rq_fair() to select_idle_sibling() - i.e. if the
select_idle_sibling called, the target would be either prev_cpu or this
cpu. Am I missing something?
Thanks,
Namhyung
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-10 5:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-09 6:50 Namhyung Kim
2013-01-09 7:33 ` Alex Shi
2013-01-09 7:38 ` Alex Shi
2013-01-09 8:00 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-01-09 7:54 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-01-09 8:34 ` Alex Shi
2013-01-10 5:52 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-01-11 2:36 ` Alex Shi
2013-01-09 8:21 ` Preeti U Murthy
2013-01-10 5:49 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2013-01-10 8:19 ` Preeti U Murthy
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=87obgxpoz6.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung.kim@lge.com \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--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®