Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261989AbVDEXmb (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:42:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261991AbVDEXmb (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:42:31 -0400 Received: from smtp208.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.130.116]:12932 "HELO smtp208.mail.sc5.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261989AbVDEXmX (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:42:23 -0400 Message-ID: <4253225C.60203@yahoo.com.au> Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 09:42:20 +1000 From: Nick Piggin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050105 Debian/1.7.5-1 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Siddha, Suresh B" CC: Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: 2.6.12-rc2-mm1 References: <20050405000524.592fc125.akpm@osdl.org> <42523F5D.7020201@yahoo.com.au> <20050405115113.A17809@unix-os.sc.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20050405115113.A17809@unix-os.sc.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1974 Lines: 72 Siddha, Suresh B wrote: > On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 05:33:49PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: >>Suresh's underlying problem with the unnecessary sched domains >>is a failing of sched-balance-exec and sched-balance-fork, which > > > That wasn't the only motivation. For example, on non-HT cpu's we shouldn't > be setting up SMT sched-domain, same with NUMA domains on non-NUMA systems. > Yep, sure. It is a good, if slight, optimisation. And I've also just slightly extended your patch, so we don't have any domains if booting with maxcpus=1 > >>I am working on now. >> >>Removing unnecessary domains is a nice optimisation, but just >>needs to account for a few more flags before declaring that a > > > Can you elaborate when we require a domain with special flags but has > no or only one group in it. > The SD_WAKE_* flags do not use groups, so it would be legitimate to have a domain that has one of these set, with no groups. > >>domain is unnecessary (not to mention this probably breaks if >>isolcpus= is used). I have made some modifications to the patch > > > I have tested my patch with "ioslcpus=" and it works just fine. > OK, my apologies ;) > >>to fix these problems. >> >>Lastly, I'd like to be a bit less intrusive with pinned task >>handling improvements. I think we can do this while still being >>effective in preventing livelocks. > > > We want to see this fixed. Please post your patch and I can let you know > the test results. > I will try to get it working and tested tonight for you. > >>I will keep you posted with regards to the various scheduler >>patches. > > > Nick, Can you post the patches you sent me earlier to this list? > Yep, I'll post them. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. - 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/