Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935059Ab3DHQTb (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 12:19:31 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:13273 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934422Ab3DHQTZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 12:19:25 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,432,1363158000"; d="scan'208";a="314809853" Subject: Re: Load balancing behavior for sched autogroup From: Tim Chen To: Paul Turner Cc: Linus Torvalds , Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , Alex Shi , Changlong Xie , linux-kernel , Peter Zijlstra In-Reply-To: References: <1364599219.27102.56.camel@schen9-DESK> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:19:21 -0700 Message-ID: <1365437961.27102.60.camel@schen9-DESK> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.3 (2.32.3-1.fc14) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 617 Lines: 20 On Fri, 2013-03-29 at 16:35 -0700, Paul Turner wrote: > I'm surprised that patch would have much effect in either direction; > it changes the amortization of accounting, but not the actual numbers > -- especially for a persistent load. We'll take a look. > Hi Paul, Wonder if you have a chance to take a look at the load imbalance with sched autogroup? Thanks. Tim -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/