Re: CPUs and processes not evenly assigned?!

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <o1e3s3$fbb$1%serpens.de@localhost>,
Michael van Elst <mlelstv%serpens.de@localhost> wrote:
>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.

I like that...

christos