[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071018231305.GA3035@Krystal>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:13:05 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
To: Ken Chen <kenchen@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] sched: schedstat needs a diet
* Ken Chen (kenchen@...gle.com) wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> wrote:
> > Good question indeed. How large is this memory footprint exactly ? If it
> > is as small as you say, I suspect that the real issue could be that
> > these variable are accessed by the scheduler critical paths and
> > therefore trash the caches.
>
> Maybe my wording was ambiguous, I meant to reduce cache line pollution
> when accessing these schedstat fields.
>
> With unsigned long, on x86_64, schedstat consumes 288 bytes for each
> sched_domain and 128 bytes in struct rq. On a extremely small system
> that has a couple of CPU sockets with one level of numa node, there
> will be 704 bytes per CPU for schedstat. Given the sparseness of
> them, we are probably talking about 11-12 cache line eviction on
> several heavily used scheduler functions. Reduce cache line pollution
> is the primary goal, actual memory consumption isn't really a concern.
>
Generally speaking, if such cache trashing is an issue, why don't we
make sure that each task struct member is declared in this structure
following its access frequency ? (except for #ifdef blocks, which should
stay together) It could then statistically save a lot of cachelines.
Or is it already the case ? It doesn't look like it when I see:
struct list_head ptrace_list;
Just beside the
struct mm_struct *mm, *active_mm;
pointers.
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists