Re: CPU Load Balancer / Scheduler / CFS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Robert...

On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 00:24, Robert W <robertwalters83@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But on 2.6.32, the distribution varies. Sometimes it's (100%, 33%,
> 33%, 33%), other times it's (100%, 100%, 50%, 50%), etc.. while all
> the other CPUs sit completely idle..
>
> Both servers have many cores (more than 4). Both servers each have 2
> physical processors, and are hyper-threaded.

Ahem, that HT might be the cause.

To elaborate more. Linux process scheduler tend to avoid the HT
sibling, because they are not "real" processor. Or if not possible to
avoid at all, then put at least load as possible.

Also, Linux kernel tries to "stick" a process into certain core within
certain time interval. This is done to make sure the L1/L2 cache is
utilized as long as possible. Processor relocation will trigger cache
invalidation and that costs a lot.

CMIIW....

-- 
regards,

Mulyadi Santosa
Freelance Linux trainer and consultant

blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com
training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies


[Index of Archives]     [Newbies FAQ]     [Linux Kernel Mentors]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [IETF Annouce]     [Git]     [Networking]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ACPI]
  Powered by Linux