On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 09:56:26AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:21:36 +0100 > Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 04:49:40AM +0000, Xunlei Pang wrote: > > > In find_lowest_rq(), if we can't find a wake_affine cpu from > > > sched_domain, then we can actually determine a cache hot cpu > > > instead of simply calling "cpumask_any(lowest_mask)" which > > > always returns the first cpu in the mask. > > > > > > So, we can determine the cache hot cpu during the interation of > > > sched_domain() in passing. > > > > Steve, I'm not getting this. Why are we using WAKE_AFFINE here? > > > > It originated from Gregory Haskins topology patches. See > 6e1254d2c41215da27025add8900ed187bca121d
Indeed so; it seems an arbitrary choice. And the proposed patch seems like a convoluted way to simply remove the ->flags & SD_WAKE_AFFINE test. Of course, the entire domain loop there assumes a lower domain is better; yay for SMT being such a good counter example ;-) Of course, if we remove it here; we should do too for deadline. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
