lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch v4 09/18] sched: add sched_policies in kernel
On 02/12/2013 06:36 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-01-24 at 11:06 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> Current scheduler behavior is just consider the for larger performance
>> of system. So it try to spread tasks on more cpu sockets and cpu cores
>>
>> To adding the consideration of power awareness, the patchset adds
>> 2 kinds of scheduler policy: powersaving and balance. They will use
>> runnable load util in scheduler balancing. The current scheduling is taken
>> as performance policy.
>>
>> performance: the current scheduling behaviour, try to spread tasks
>> on more CPU sockets or cores. performance oriented.
>> powersaving: will pack tasks into few sched group until all LCPU in the
>> group is full, power oriented.
>> balance : will pack tasks into few sched group until group_capacity
>> numbers CPU is full, balance between performance and
>> powersaving.
>
> _WHY_ do you start out with so much choice?
>
> If your power policy is so abysmally poor on performance that you
> already know you need a 3rd policy to keep people happy, maybe you're
> doing something wrong?

Nope, no much performance yield for both of powersaving and balance policy.
Much of testing results in replaying Ingo's email on '0/18' thread --
the cover letter email threads.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/3/353
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/2/4/735

I introduce a 'balance' policy just because HT thread LCPU in Intel CPU
is less then 1 usual cpu power. It is used when someone want to save
power but still want tasks have a whole cpu core...
>
>> +#define SCHED_POLICY_PERFORMANCE (0x1)
>> +#define SCHED_POLICY_POWERSAVING (0x2)
>> +#define SCHED_POLICY_BALANCE (0x4)
>> +
>> +extern int __read_mostly sched_policy;
>
> I'd much prefer: sched_balance_policy. Scheduler policy is a concept
> already well defined by posix and we don't need it to mean two
> completely different things.
>

Got it.
--
Thanks
Alex


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-13 17:21    [W:0.499 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site