lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Feb]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH v4 00/19] Core scheduling v4
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 06:40:02PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:34 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:32:35PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote:
> > > Aaron - did you test this before? In other words, if you reset repo to your
> > > last commit:
> >
> > I did this test only recently when I started to think if I can use
> > coresched to boost main workload's performance in a colocated
> > environment.
> >
> > >
> > > - 5bd3c80 sched/fair : Wake up forced idle siblings if needed
> > >
> > > Does the problem remain? Just want to check if this is a regression
> > > introduced by the subsequent patchset.
> >
> > The problem isn't there with commit 5bd3c80 as the head, so yes, it
> > looks like indeed a regression introduced by subsequent patchset.
> >
> > P.S. I will need to take a closer look if each cgA's task is running
> > on a different core later but the cpu usage of cgA is back to 800% with
> > commit 5bd3c80.
>
> Hmm..., I went through the subsequent patches, and I think this one
>
> - 4041eeb8f3 sched/fair: don't migrate task if cookie not match
>
> is probably the major cause, can you please revert this one to see
> if the problem is gone?

Yes, reverting this one fixed the problem.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-02-25 12:23    [W:0.102 / U:3.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site