Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-08 Thread Tim Chen
On 7/1/19 7:04 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:55:52PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: >> On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > >>> Some of the things we could tie to this would be: >>> >>> - select_idle_siblings; -nice would scan more than +nice, >> >> Just to be sure, y

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-04 Thread Parth Shah
Hi, On 7/3/19 9:22 AM, Subhra Mazumdar wrote: > > On 7/2/19 1:54 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote: >> Wondering if searching and preempting needs will ever be conflicting? >> I guess the winning point is that we don't commit behaviors to >> userspace, but just abstract concepts which are turned into bia

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-02 Thread Subhra Mazumdar
On 7/2/19 1:54 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote: Wondering if searching and preempting needs will ever be conflicting? I guess the winning point is that we don't commit behaviors to userspace, but just abstract concepts which are turned into biases. I don't see conflicts right now: if you are latency

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-02 Thread Patrick Bellasi
On 01-Jul 17:01, Subhra Mazumdar wrote: > > On 7/1/19 6:55 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > > On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 06:29:12PM -0700, subhra mazumdar wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Resending this patchset, will be good to get some feedback. Any > >

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-01 Thread Subhra Mazumdar
On 7/1/19 6:55 AM, Patrick Bellasi wrote: On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 06:29:12PM -0700, subhra mazumdar wrote: Hi, Resending this patchset, will be good to get some feedback. Any suggestions that will make it more acceptable are welcome. We have been shippi

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-01 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:55:52PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Hmmm? > > Just one more requirement I think it's worth to consider since the > beginning: CGroups support > > That would be very welcome interface. Just because is so much more > conveni

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-01 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, Jul 01, 2019 at 02:55:52PM +0100, Patrick Bellasi wrote: > On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > Some of the things we could tie to this would be: > > > > - select_idle_siblings; -nice would scan more than +nice, > > Just to be sure, you are not proposing to use the nice value we

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-01 Thread Patrick Bellasi
On 01-Jul 11:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 06:29:12PM -0700, subhra mazumdar wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Resending this patchset, will be good to get some feedback. Any suggestions > > that will make it more acceptable are welcome. We have been shipping this > > with Unbreakable E

Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-07-01 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 06:29:12PM -0700, subhra mazumdar wrote: > Hi, > > Resending this patchset, will be good to get some feedback. Any suggestions > that will make it more acceptable are welcome. We have been shipping this > with Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel in Oracle Linux. > > Current sele

[RESEND PATCH v3 0/7] Improve scheduler scalability for fast path

2019-06-26 Thread subhra mazumdar
Hi, Resending this patchset, will be good to get some feedback. Any suggestions that will make it more acceptable are welcome. We have been shipping this with Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel in Oracle Linux. Current select_idle_sibling first tries to find a fully idle core using select_idle_core wh