From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: Break up long wake list walk
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 12:58:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170818195858.GP28715@tassilo.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFwX0yrUPULrDxTWVCg5c6DKh-yCG84NXVxaptXNQ4O_kA@mail.gmail.com>
> which is hacky, but there's a rationale for it:
>
> (a) avoid the crazy long wait queues ;)
>
> (b) we know that migration is *supposed* to be CPU-bound (not IO
> bound), so yielding the CPU and retrying may just be the right thing
> to do.
So this would degenerate into a spin when the contention is with
other CPUs?
But then if we guarantee that migration has flat latency curve
and no long tail it may be reasonable.
If the contention is with the local CPU it could cause some
unfairness (and in theory priority inheritance issues with local
CPU contenders?), but hopefully not too bad.
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-18 19:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-15 0:52 Tim Chen
2017-08-15 0:52 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/wait: Introduce lock breaker in wake_up_page_bit Tim Chen
2017-08-15 1:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/wait: Break up long wake list walk Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 2:27 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-15 2:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 3:15 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-15 3:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 19:05 ` Tim Chen
2017-08-15 19:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 19:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 22:47 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2017-08-15 22:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 22:57 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-15 23:50 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-16 23:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-08-17 16:17 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-17 16:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-17 20:18 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-17 20:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 12:23 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-18 14:20 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-18 14:46 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-18 16:36 ` Tim Chen
2017-08-18 16:45 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-18 16:53 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-18 17:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 18:54 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-18 19:14 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 19:58 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2017-08-18 20:10 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-21 18:32 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-21 18:56 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-22 17:23 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-22 18:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 18:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 18:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-22 19:15 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 19:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-22 19:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 19:37 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-22 21:08 ` Christopher Lameter
2017-08-22 21:24 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-22 22:52 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 23:19 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-23 14:51 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-22 19:55 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-22 20:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-22 20:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-22 20:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-23 14:49 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-23 15:58 ` Tim Chen
2017-08-23 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-23 20:55 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-23 23:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-24 17:49 ` Tim Chen
2017-08-24 18:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-24 20:44 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-25 16:44 ` Tim Chen
2017-08-23 16:04 ` Mel Gorman
2017-08-18 20:05 ` Andi Kleen
2017-08-18 20:29 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 20:29 ` Liang, Kan
2017-08-18 20:34 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 16:55 ` Linus Torvalds
2017-08-18 13:06 ` Liang, Kan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170818195858.GP28715@tassilo.jf.intel.com \
--to=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox