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

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: <20110913180146.GA12723@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 13 Sep 2011 23:31:46 +0530
From:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@...allels.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@...il.com>,
	Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...allels.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vs
 unpinnede

* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> [2011-09-13 16:19:39]:

> > Booting with "nohz=off" also helps significantly.
> > 
> > With nohz=on, average idle time (over 1 min) is 10.3%
> > With nohz=off, average idle time (over 1 min) is 3.9%
>
> So we should put the cpufreq/idle governor into the nohz/idle path, it
> already tries to predict the idle duration in order to pick a C state,
> that same prediction should be used to determine if stopping the tick is
> worth it.

Hmm ..I tried performance governor and found that it slightly increases
idle time.

  With nohz=off && ondemand governor, idle time = 4%
  With nohz=off && performance governor on all cpus, idle time = 6%

I can't see obvious reasons for that ..afaict bandwidth capping should
be independent of frequency (i.e task gets capped by "used" time,
irrespective of frequency at which it was "using" the cpu)?

- vatsa
--
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/