[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080118105545.GC12228@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 11:55:45 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Colin Fowler <elethiomel@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: Performance loss 2.6.22->22.6.23->2.6.24-rc7 on CPU intensive
benchmark on 8 Core Xeon
* Colin Fowler <elethiomel@...il.com> wrote:
> > there are a handful of 'scheduler feature bits' in
> > /proc/sys/kernel/sched_features:
> >
> > enum {
> > SCHED_FEAT_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS = 1,
> > SCHED_FEAT_WAKEUP_PREEMPT = 2,
> > SCHED_FEAT_START_DEBIT = 4,
> > SCHED_FEAT_TREE_AVG = 8,
> > SCHED_FEAT_APPROX_AVG = 16,
> > };
> >
>
> Toggling SCHED_FEAT_NEW_FAIR_SLEEPERS to 0 or
> SCHED_FEAT_WAKEUP_PREEMPT to 0 gives me results more inline with my
> 2.6.22 results. Toggling them both to 0 gives me slightly better
> results than 2.6.22!
ok, but it would be nice to avoid having to turn these off. Could you
try whether tuning the /proc/sys/kernel/*granularity* values (in
particular wakeup_granularity) has any positive effect on your workload?
also, could you run your workload as SCHED_BATCH [via schedtool -B ],
does that improve the results as well on a default-tuned kernel?
Ingo
--
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