On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 03:29 -0700, David Miller wrote:
quoted text
> From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 12:25:11 +0200
> 
> > Dhaval, Vatsa,
> > 
> > Could you guys give this patch a spin on the big iron and possibly tune
> > the default shares_ratelimit value to give satisfactory fairness on your
> > large machines while considering the overhead?
> > 
> > 
> > ---
> > Subject: sched: scale sysctl_sched_shares_ratelimit with nr_cpus
> > 
> > David reported that his Niagra spend a little too much time in
> > tg_shares_up(), which considering he has a large cpu count makes sense.
> > 
> > So scale the ratelimit value with the number of cpus like we do for
> > other controls as well.
> > 
> > Reported-by: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> 
> This turned out to be a false theory, and the lockdep problem I
> reported the past few days was the real culprit.
> 
> The rebalancing et al. showing up in my debugging dumps was
> just chance and not even consistent.

Ah, still I think the proposed change makes sense, but lets wait for
some test results from Dhaval and or Vatsa.. ;-)

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