Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch] sched: beef up wake_wide() | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Tue, 14 Jul 2015 15:49:17 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2015-07-14 at 13:19 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> OK, how about something like the below; it tightens things up by > applying two rules: > > - We really should not continue looking for a balancing domain once > SD_LOAD_BALANCE is not set. > > - SD (balance) flags should really be set in a single contiguous range, > always starting at the bottom. > > The latter means what if !want_affine and the (first) sd doesn't have > BALANCE_WAKE set, we're done. Getting rid of (most of) that iteration > junk you didn't like.. > > Hmm?
Yeah, that's better. It's not big hairy deal either way, it just bugged me to knowingly toss those cycles out the window ;-)
select_idle_sibling() looks kinda funny down there, but otoh when the day comes (hah) that we can just balance, it's closer to the exit.
-Mike
| |