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: <1316161720.10174.0.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:28:40 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Cc:	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.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

On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 01:14 -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
> On 09/13/11 11:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 23:31 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> >> * 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%
> 
> I think more compelling here is that it looks like nohz load-balance 
> needs more love.

Quite probable, although I do know we tend to go overboard in going into
nohz state too.

> > That's not what I said.. what I said is that the nohz code should also
> > use the idle time prognosis.. disabling the tick is a costly operation,
> > doing it only to have to undo it costs time, and will be accounted to
> > idle time, hence your improvement with nohz=off.
> >
> 
> Enabling Venki's CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING=y would discount to provide 
> a definitive answer here yes?

Ah, yes, its all (soft)irq context anyway, no need to also account
systemcalls.
--
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/