Re: [PATCH 3/4] sched: drop group_capacity to 1 only if localgroup has extra capacity

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 10:13 -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 10:05 -0700, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > For regular balancing local_group will be the first, since we only
> > ascend the domain tree on the local groups. But its not true for no_hz
> > balancing afaikt.
> 
> Even for NOHZ, we always ascend each cpu's sched domain and the local
> group is the first one always. But yes, we are depending on the local
> group being the first group.

Ah, yes, we take the balance_cpu's domain tree, not the local cpu's
domain tee.

Hrm,.. ok feels slightly tricky though.
--
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/