On 10/22/08 10:01, Eric Saxe wrote:
> Hi Aubrey,
>
> Li, Aubrey wrote:
>   
>> Currently we have two kinds of cmt policy across the hierarchical processor
>> group. So it's possible a thread want to be dispatched by the performance
>> policy but there is only power related processor group avaiable.
>>
>> The following patch adds a member into kthread_t structure, and use the same
>> event driver which is used to notify cpupm to change p-state, to make the 
>> next
>> kernel thread sensitive to the cmt policy, so that in later cmt balance, we
>> can choose cpu by searching the related target processor group, unrelated
>> groups will be ignored.
>>   
>> What do you think?
>>     
>
> It makes sense to me to consider only certain levels of the PG hierarchy 
> for load balancing and coalescence depending on things like resource 
> utilization, policy preferences, etc. I wasn't thinking that this would
>   

For example a fully loaded system could ignore the Idle Power PG level.

> be implemented on a per thread basis however. At least for now, I was 
> thinking this would be implemented on a per CPU basis, by modifying the 
> lineage in the CPU's PG data when the policy is changed (for example, 
> removing the power domain from from the lineage for performance mode (or 
> at least demoting it below the load balancing one)). That way, we don't
>   

Since the PG lineage is per-cpu, we could create a non-homogeneous
policy system.  For example a moderately loaded 2-socket system
could schedule most threads onto one socket which has performance
lineage while the other socket has just power saving lineage.


> have have to add the extra conditional logic in cmt_policy.c...which is 
> somewhat performance critical.
>
> Looking ahead, I can see the value of the per thread policy, but I don't 
> know if we have the motivation for it yet?
>   

Per-thread settings would allow Real Time threads and
high priority tasks to be scheduled by a different policy
such as a more performance-oriented policy.

Regards,
Bill

> Thanks,
> -Eric
> _______________________________________________
> tesla-dev mailing list
> tesla-dev at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/tesla-dev
>   


Reply via email to