linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: only run newidle if previous task was CFS

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1214303888.4351.24.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 24 Jun 2008 12:38:08 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Cc:	mingo@...e.hu, rostedt@...dmis.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
	dbahi@...ell.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] sched: only run newidle if previous task was CFS

On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 11:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-23 at 17:04 -0600, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> > A system that tends to overschedule (such as PREEMPT_RT) will naturally
> > tend to newidle balance often as well.  This may have quite a negative
> > impact on performance.  This patch attempts to address the overzealous
> > newidle balancing by only allowing it to occur if the previous task
> > was SCHED_OTHER.
> > 
> > Some may argue that if the system is going idle, it should try to
> > newidle balance to keep it doing useful work.  But the fact is that
> > spending too much time in the load-balancing code demonstrably hurts
> > performance as well.  Running oprofile on the system with various
> > workloads has shown that we can sometimes spend a majority of our
> > cpu-time running load_balance_newidle.  Additionally, disabling
> > newidle balancing can make said workloads increase in performance by
> > up to 200%.  Obviously disabling the feature outright is not sustainable,
> > but hopefully we can make it smarter. 
> > 
> > This code assumes that if there arent any CFS tasks present on the queue,
> > it was probably already balanced.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
> 
> NAK, this wrecks idle balance for any potential other classes.
> 
> idle_balance() is the generical hook - as can be seen from the class
> iteration in move_tasks().
> 
> I can imagine paritioned EDF wanting to make use of these hooks to
> balance the reservations.

Hmm, it wouldn't,.. since its too tied in with fbg which is sched_other
based,..

would need more generalization work,..



--
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/