[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1358933824.5752.136.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:37:04 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>
To: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched: simplify the select_task_rq_fair()
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 17:26 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> On 01/23/2013 05:18 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 17:00 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> >> On 01/23/2013 04:49 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 16:30 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> >>>> On 01/23/2013 04:20 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 15:10 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> >>>>>> On 01/23/2013 02:28 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> Abbreviated test run:
> >>>>>>> Tasks jobs/min jti jobs/min/task real cpu
> >>>>>>> 640 158044.01 81 246.9438 24.54 577.66 Wed Jan 23 07:14:33 2013
> >>>>>>> 1280 50434.33 39 39.4018 153.80 5737.57 Wed Jan 23 07:17:07 2013
> >>>>>>> 2560 47214.07 34 18.4430 328.58 12715.56 Wed Jan 23 07:22:36 2013
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> So still not works... and not going to balance path while waking up will
> >>>>>> fix it, looks like that's the only choice if no error on balance path
> >>>>>> could be found...benchmark wins again, I'm feeling bad...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I will conclude the info we collected and make a v3 later.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> FWIW, I hacked virgin to do full balance if an idle CPU was not found,
> >>>>> leaving the preference to wake cache affine intact though, turned on
> >>>>> WAKE_BALANCE in all domains, and it did not collapse. In fact, the high
> >>>>> load end, where the idle search will frequently be a waste of cycles,
> >>>>> actually improved a bit. Things that make ya go hmmm.
> >>>>
> >>>> Oh, does that means the old balance path is good while the new is really
> >>>> broken, I mean, compared this with the previously results, could we say
> >>>> that all the collapse was just caused by the change of balance path?
> >>>
> >>> That's a good supposition. I'll see if it holds.
> >>
> >> I just notice that there is no sd support the WAKE flag at all according
> >> to your debug info, isn't it?
> >
> > There is, I turned it on in all domains.
? Virgin doesn't have any of your patches. In virgin, I can twiddle
flags effectively with a script.
With your patches, I have to make that happen from the start for it to
be effective, but not in virgin (well nearly virgin) 3.8-rc3.
-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