Re: CPUs and processes not evenly assigned?!

[mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost (Michael van Elst)]

hubert%feyrer.de@localhost (Hubert Feyrer) writes:

>a) leave the situation as-is and wait for research to get a perfect formula
>b) commit the patch we have and wait for the research to be done

>Given that the existing patch in PR kern/43561 and PR kern/51615 does 
>improve the current situation, I'd vote for option "b".

While that change is obviously good for the heavy-cpu case, I tried to
test this with other workloads, in particular a system build. There
the build was a few percent slower.

We should at least benchmark a few other use cases to see wether the
scheduler change isn't a regression.

I've made a new patch:

http://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/mlelstv/kern_runq.diff

-> it uses 8 guard bits (multiply by 256 instead of 2).
-> it lets you configure the moving average factor in percent
   (default is 50% like now) with a sysctl.


-- 
-- 
                                Michael van Elst
Internet: mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost
                                "A potential Snark may lurk in every tree."