On 05/14/2013 05:34 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
>> >
>> > We also tried to include blocked load avg in balance. but find many
>> > benchmark
>> > performance dropping. Guess the too bigger cpu load drive task to be waken
>> > on remote CPU, and cause wrong decision in periodic balance.
> Fundamentally, I think we should be exploring this space.
I thought something of this. but can not figure out a direction or stand
by some theories.
>
> While it's perhaps not surprising that it's not a drop-in, since the
> current code was tuned always considering the instaneous balance, it
> seems the likely path to increased balance stability.
>
> Although, if the code is yielding substantive benefits in its current
> form we should consider merging it in the interim.
Sorry, I can not follow you here.
>
--
Thanks
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
