On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 07:19 +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: > We were discussing the impact of this consolidation and we are not too > sure if it will yield us good power efficiency. So we would want to > experiment with the power aware scheduler to find the "sweet spot" for > the number of threads to consolidate to and more importantly if there > is > one such number at all. Else we would not want to go this way at all. > Hence it looks best if this patch is dropped until we validate it. We > don't want the code getting in and then out if we find out later there > are no benefits to it. > > I am sorry that I suggested this patch a bit pre-mature in the > experimentation and validation stage. When you release the load > balancing patchset for power aware scheduler I shall validate this > patch. But until then its best if it does not get merged.
It's quite possible that we never find a correct "sweet spot" for all workloads. Ideally, the "target" number of used threads per core should be a tunable so that the user / distro can "tune" based on a given workload whether to pack cores and how much to pack them, vs. spreading the workload. Akin to scheduling for performance vs. power in a way (though lower perf usually means higher power due to longer running jobs of course). In any case, we need to experiment. Cheers, Ben. -- 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/