Re: [PATCH] Load balancing problem in 2.6.2-mm1

[Nick Piggin]

Anton Blanchard wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> > The current imbalance code rounds up to 1, meaning that we'll often
> > see an "imbalance" of 1 even when it's 1 to 0 and just been moved.
> > Did you see these results even with Martin's patch to not round up to 1?
>
> Indeed Martins patch does fix the problem:
>
> cpu    user  system    idle             cpu    user  system    idle
> cpu0      0       0     100             cpu1      0       0     100
> cpu2      0       0     100             cpu3      0       0     100
> cpu4      0       0     100             cpu5      0       0     100
> cpu6      0       0     100             cpu7      0       0     100
> cpu8      0       0     100             cpu9      0       0     100
> cpu10     0       0     100             cpu11     0       0     100
> cpu12     0       0     100             cpu13   100       0       0
> cpu14     0       0     100             cpu15     0       0     100
>
> My current tree has your patch and Martins patch. So far its looking
> good.

Rick's being the one I sent you?

Does active balancing still work? Ie. get two processes running on the
same physical CPU and see if one is migrated away.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/