Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 11:44:19 +0000
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, mingo@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
        kernellwp@gmail.com, yuyang.du@intel.com, umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] sched: fix find_idlest_group for fork
Message-ID: <20161129114419.GC20785@codeblueprint.co.uk>
References: <1480088073-11642-1-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
 <1480088073-11642-2-git-send-email-vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
 <20161129105758.GA1716@e105550-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20161129114243.GF3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161129114243.GF3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24+41 (02bc14ed1569) (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 397
Lines: 10

On Tue, 29 Nov, at 12:42:43PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> IIRC, and my pounding head really doesn't remember much, the comment
> reads like we need the large fudge factor because hackbench. That is,
> hackbench would like this test to go away, but others benchmarks will
> tank.
> 
> Now, if only I would've written down which benchmarks that were.. awell.
 
Going out on a limb: Chris' schbench?