On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 09:09:30AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Scott Cheloha <scottchel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > How about this. Kill the spc_ldavg calculation. Its use is more then
> > > > questionable. The cpu selection code using this is not wroking well and
> > > > process stealing will do the rest.
> > 
> > This is more or less what I said yesterday.  The per-CPU load average
> > is not useful for deciding where to put a thread.
> I guess you have not been reading mpi's scheduler diff.  The entire idea
> of "placing a thread" is 1980's single-processor flawed.

Dude, I'm not talking about mpi's patch, I'm talking about what's in
the tree.

Given the current state of the scheduler, we can throw out spc_ldavg.
It isn't necessary.

> > Of the variables we
> > have available to consider, only the current length of the runqueue is
> > useful.
> No, that concept is also broken.

Again, I am talking about the current scheduler.

Said another way: the current approach can limp along just fine using
only the runqueue length.  We can get rid of spc_ldavg without
worrying about it.

Reply via email to