lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH RESEND] sched: prefer an idle cpu vs an idle sibling for BALANCE_WAKE
From
Date
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



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-28 15:01    [W:0.104 / U:0.928 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site