On 18 February 2014 13:05, Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmus...@arm.com> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 01:55:06AM +0000, Alex Shi wrote: >> The cpu_load decays on time according past cpu load of rq. The sched_avg >> also decays tasks' load on time. Now we has 2 kind decay for cpu_load. That >> is a kind of redundancy. And increase the system load by decay calculation. >> This patch try to remove the cpu_load decay. >> >> There are 5 load_idx used for cpu_load in sched_domain. busy_idx and >> idle_idx are not zero usually, but newidle_idx, wake_idx and forkexec_idx >> are all zero on every arch. A shortcut to remove cpu_Load decay in the first >> patch. just one line patch for this change. >> >> V2, >> 1, This version do some tuning on load bias of target load, to maximum match >> current code logical. >> 2, Got further to remove the cpu_load in rq. >> 3, Revert the patch 'Limit sd->*_idx range on sysctl' since no needs >> >> Any testing/comments are appreciated. > > Removing cpu_load completely certainly makes things simpler, my worry is > just how much was lost by doing it. I agree that cpu_load needs a > cleanup, but I can't convince myself that just removing it completely > and not having any longer term view of cpu load anymore is without any > negative side-effects.
Hi Alex, Have you followed this thread about load_idx and the interest of using them to use different average period ? https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/1/6/499 Vincent > > {source, target}_load() are now instantaneous views of the cpu load, > which means that they may change very frequently. That could potentially > lead to more task migrations at all levels in the domain hierarchy as we > no longer have the more conservative cpu_load[] indexes that were used > at NUMA level. > > Maybe some of the NUMA experts have an opinion about this? > > In the discussions around V1 I think blocked load came up again as a > potential replacement for the current cpu_load array. There are some > issues that need to be solved around blocked_load first though. > > Morten -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/