Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] sched: prefer an idle cpu vs an idle sibling for BALANCE_WAKE | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Thu, 28 May 2015 14:15:03 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 13:49 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Mike Galbraith <mgalbraith@novell.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 12:21 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > In fact, select_idle_sibling() is already too expensive on current > > > server hardware (far too damn many cpus in a LLC domain). > > > > Yup. I've played with rate limiting motion per task because of that. > > Packages have gotten way too damn big. > > What's the biggest you've seen?
15 cores so far. It'll no doubt grow.
-Mike
| |