On Thursday 09 Aug 2018 at 11:30:57 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 14:26, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > From: Morten Rasmussen
> >
> > Energy-aware scheduling is only meant to be active while the system is
> > _not_ over-utilized. That is, there are spare cycles availabl
On Tue, 24 Jul 2018 at 14:26, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> From: Morten Rasmussen
>
> Energy-aware scheduling is only meant to be active while the system is
> _not_ over-utilized. That is, there are spare cycles available to shift
> tasks around based on their actual utilization to get a more
> ener
On 08/06/2018 02:37 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 14:29, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
On 08/06/2018 12:33 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 12:08, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
On 08/06/2018 10:40 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perre
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 14:29, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>
> On 08/06/2018 12:33 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 12:08, Dietmar Eggemann
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 08/06/2018 10:40 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret
> >>> wrote:
>
>
On 08/06/2018 12:33 PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 12:08, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
On 08/06/2018 10:40 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 15:49:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:
On Monday 06 Aug 2018 at 12:45:44 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 11:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> I would have preferred to have a full power policy for all task when
> EAS is in used by default and then see if there is any performance
> problem instead of letting some UC un
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 11:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Monday 06 Aug 2018 at 10:40:46 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > For every new task, the cpu selection is done assuming it's a heavy
> > task with the max possible load_avg, and it
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 at 12:08, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>
> On 08/06/2018 10:40 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >>
> >> On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 15:49:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> >>> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret
> >>> wrot
On 08/06/2018 10:40 AM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 15:49:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret wrote:
On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
On Thu,
On Monday 06 Aug 2018 at 10:40:46 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
> For every new task, the cpu selection is done assuming it's a heavy
> task with the max possible load_avg, and it looks for the idlest cpu.
> This means that if the system is l
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 17:55, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 15:49:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quenti
On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 15:49:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret
> > > wrote:
> > > I'm not really concerned about re-
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 15:49, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret
> > > wrote:
> > > I'm not really concerned about re-enabling lo
On Fri, 3 Aug 2018 at 10:18, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > I'm not really concerned about re-enabling load balance but more that
> > the effort of packing of tasks in few cpus/
On Friday 03 Aug 2018 at 09:48:47 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret wrote:
> I'm not really concerned about re-enabling load balance but more that
> the effort of packing of tasks in few cpus/clusters that EAS tries to
> do can be broken for every new ta
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:59, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:38:01 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:10, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:07:49 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:00, Qu
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:38:01 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:10, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:07:49 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:00, Quentin Perret
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:10, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:07:49 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:00, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:55:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 17:30, Qu
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 18:07:49 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:00, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:55:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 17:30, Quentin Perret
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 18:00, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:55:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 17:30, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:14:15 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 16:14, Qu
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:55:24 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 17:30, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:14:15 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 16:14, Quentin Perret
> > > wrote:
> > > > Good point, setting the util
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 17:30, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:14:15 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 16:14, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > Good point, setting the util_avg to 0 for new tasks should help
> > > filtering out those tiny tasks too. And tha
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 17:14:15 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 16:14, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > Good point, setting the util_avg to 0 for new tasks should help
> > filtering out those tiny tasks too. And that would match with the idea
> > of letting tasks build their h
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 16:14, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:48:01 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 15:19, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:08:01 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:03:38
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:48:01 (+0200), Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 15:19, Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:08:01 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:03:38PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018
On Thu, 2 Aug 2018 at 15:19, Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:08:01 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:03:38PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 14:26:29 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 15:08:01 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:03:38PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 14:26:29 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:25:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > > @@ -5100,8 +5118,
On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 02:03:38PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 14:26:29 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:25:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > > @@ -5100,8 +5118,17 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct
> > > task_struct *p, int fl
On Thursday 02 Aug 2018 at 14:26:29 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:25:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > @@ -5100,8 +5118,17 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct
> > *p, int flags)
> > update_cfs_group(se);
> > }
> >
> > - if (!
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 01:25:16PM +0100, Quentin Perret wrote:
> @@ -5100,8 +5118,17 @@ enqueue_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct
> *p, int flags)
> update_cfs_group(se);
> }
>
> - if (!se)
> + if (!se) {
> add_nr_running(rq, 1);
> +
From: Morten Rasmussen
Energy-aware scheduling is only meant to be active while the system is
_not_ over-utilized. That is, there are spare cycles available to shift
tasks around based on their actual utilization to get a more
energy-efficient task distribution without depriving any tasks. When
a
31 matches
Mail list logo