| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1204215191.4319.7.camel@homer.simson.net> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:13:11 +0100 From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Dhaval Giani <dhaval@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: revert load_balance_monitor() On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 14:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Mike, could you check whether today's sched-devel.git (which includes > the full revert) works well for you? (with group scheduler enabled) No, it's fairly lurchy with three root chew-max and one user chew-max running. Moving the mouse around while they're running, I can see/feel the load, and max latency for the user chew-max quickly shoots to >500ms. Running the same with mainline + full revert, the load is not palpable and max latency for user task was 83ms. Group CPU distribution otoh is better than mainline git + full revert. root out 16 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 7], ran for 20 ms out 16 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 0, avg_flu: 7], ran for 9 ms out 5 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 10, avg_flu: 7], ran for 13 ms out 33 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 28, avg_flu: 7], ran for 12 ms out 12 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 20, avg_flu: 7], ran for 13 ms out 16 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 3, avg_flu: 7], ran for 4 ms out 21 ms [max: 295, avg: 14, flu: 4, avg_flu: 7], ran for 8 ms root out 7 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 3, avg_flu: 8], ran for 5 ms out 27 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 20, avg_flu: 8], ran for 13 ms out 17 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 10, avg_flu: 8], ran for 9 ms out 8 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 8, avg_flu: 8], ran for 7 ms out 6 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 8], ran for 9 ms out 10 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 3, avg_flu: 8], ran for 10 ms out 8 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 1, avg_flu: 8], ran for 12 ms out 13 ms [max: 248, avg: 14, flu: 5, avg_flu: 8], ran for 9 ms root out 11 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 6], ran for 7 ms out 10 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 1, avg_flu: 6], ran for 5 ms out 12 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 1, avg_flu: 6], ran for 9 ms out 10 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 1, avg_flu: 6], ran for 8 ms out 13 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 6], ran for 13 ms out 11 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 6], ran for 13 ms out 9 ms [max: 366, avg: 14, flu: 2, avg_flu: 6], ran for 9 ms user out 3 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 1, avg_flu: 13], ran for 27 ms out 2 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 0, avg_flu: 13], ran for 12 ms out 2 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 0, avg_flu: 13], ran for 2 ms out 25 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 22, avg_flu: 13], ran for 74 ms out 3 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 21, avg_flu: 13], ran for 29 ms out 6 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 3, avg_flu: 13], ran for 17 ms out 5 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 0, avg_flu: 13], ran for 28 ms out 2 ms [max: 509, avg: 20, flu: 3, avg_flu: 13], ran for 34 ms -Mike -- 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