linux-kernel - Re: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vs unpinned

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]

Date:	Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:35:33 +0530
From:	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Cc:	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>
Subject: Re: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vs
 unpinned

* Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com> [2011-06-21 12:48:17]:

> Hi Kamalesh,
> 
> Can you see what things look like under v7?
> 
> There's been a few improvements to quota re-distribution that should
> hopefully help your test case.
> 
> The remaining idle% I see on my machines appear to be a product of
> load-balancer inefficiency.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> - Paul
(snip)

Hi Paul,

Sorry for the delay in the response. I tried the V7 patchset on 
top of tip. Patchset passed different combinations build and boot 
tests. 

I have re-run the tests with couple of combinations on the same 
2 socket,4 core, HT box. The test data was collected for 60 seconds
run

un-pinned and cpu shares of 1024
-------------------------------------------------
Top five cgroups and its sub-cgroups were assigned default
cpu shares of 1024.

Average CPU Idle percentage 21.8333%
Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 78.1667%


un-pinned and cpu shares are proportional 
--------------------------------------------------
Top five cgroups were assigned cpu shares proportional to 
no of sub-cgroups it has under its hierarchy. 
For example cgroup1's share is (1024*2) = 2048 and each sub-cgroups 
has shares of 1024.

Average CPU Idle percentage 14.2%
Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 85.8%


pinned and cpu shares of 1024
--------------------------------------------------
Average CPU Idle percentage 0.0666667%
Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 99.9333333%


pinned and cpu shares are proportional
--------------------------------------------------
Average CPU Idle percentage 0%
Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 100%


I have captured the perf sched stats for every run. Let me
know if that will help. I can mail them to you privately.

Thanks,
Kamalesh.
--
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/