Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 02 May 2014 02:30:25 -0400 | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC/TEST] sched: make sync affine wakeups work |
| |
On 05/02/2014 02:13 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2014-05-02 at 00:42 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > >> Whether or not this is the right thing to do remains to be seen, >> but it does allow us to verify whether or not the wake_affine >> strategy of always doing affine wakeups and only disabling them >> in a specific circumstance is sound, or needs rethinking... > > Yes, it needs rethinking. > > I know why you want to try this, yes, select_idle_sibling() is very much > a two faced little bitch.
My biggest problem with select_idle_sibling and wake_affine in general is that it will override NUMA placement, even when processes only wake each other up infrequently...
-- All rights reversed
| |