| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50FF4EA0.1070000@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:44:48 +0800 From: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de> 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 01/22/2013 10:41 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 16:56 +0800, Michael Wang wrote: > >> What about this patch? May be the wrong map is the killer on balance >> path, should we check it? ;-) > > [ 1.232249] Brought up 40 CPUs > [ 1.236003] smpboot: Total of 40 processors activated (180873.90 BogoMIPS) > [ 1.244744] CPU0 attaching sched-domain: > [ 1.254131] NMI watchdog: enabled on all CPUs, permanently consumes one hw-PMU counter. > [ 1.252010] domain 0: span 0,16 level SIBLING > [ 1.280001] groups: 0 (cpu_power = 589) 16 (cpu_power = 589) > [ 1.292540] domain 1: span 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32,34,36,38 level MC > [ 1.312001] groups: 0,16 (cpu_power = 1178) 2,18 (cpu_power = 1178) 4,20 (cpu_power = 1178) 6,22 (cpu_power = 1178) 8,24 (cpu_power = 1178) > 10,26 (cpu_power = 1178)12,28 (cpu_power = 1178)14,30 (cpu_power = 1178)32,36 (cpu_power = 1178)34,38 (cpu_power = 1178) > [ 1.368002] domain 2: span 0-39 level NUMA > [ 1.376001] groups: 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24,26,28,30,32,34,36,38 (cpu_power = 11780) > 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19,21,23,25,27,29,31,33,35,37,39 (cpu_power = 11780) Thanks for the testing, that's not all the output but just for cpu 0, correct? > [ 1.412546] WYT: sbm of cpu 0 > [ 1.416001] WYT: exec map > [ 1.424002] WYT: sd 6ce55000, idx 0, level 0, weight 2 > [ 1.436001] WYT: sd 6ce74000, idx 1, level 1, weight 20 > [ 1.448001] WYT: sd 6cef3000, idx 3, level 3, weight 40 > [ 1.460001] WYT: fork map > [ 1.468001] WYT: sd 6ce55000, idx 0, level 0, weight 2 > [ 1.480001] WYT: sd 6ce74000, idx 1, level 1, weight 20 This is not by design... sd in idx 2 should point to level 1 sd if there is no level 2 sd, this part is broken...oh, how could level 3 sd be there with out level 2 created? strange... So with this map, the new balance path will no doubt broken, I think we got the reason, amazing ;-) Let's see how to fix it, hmm... need some study firstly. Regards, Michael Wang > [ 1.492001] WYT: sd 6cef3000, idx 3, level 3, weight 40 > [ 1.504001] WYT: wake map > Hi, we're not home right now... > [ 1.508001] WYT: affine map > [ 1.516001] WYT: affine with cpu 0 in sd 6ce55000, weight 2 > [ 1.528001] WYT: affine with cpu 1 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.544001] WYT: affine with cpu 2 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.556001] WYT: affine with cpu 3 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.568001] WYT: affine with cpu 4 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.584001] WYT: affine with cpu 5 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.596001] WYT: affine with cpu 6 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.608001] WYT: affine with cpu 7 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.624001] WYT: affine with cpu 8 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.636001] WYT: affine with cpu 9 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.648001] WYT: affine with cpu a in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.660001] WYT: affine with cpu b in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.676001] WYT: affine with cpu c in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.688001] WYT: affine with cpu d in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.700001] WYT: affine with cpu e in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.716001] WYT: affine with cpu f in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.728001] WYT: affine with cpu 10 in sd 6ce55000, weight 2 > [ 1.740001] WYT: affine with cpu 11 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.756001] WYT: affine with cpu 12 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.768001] WYT: affine with cpu 13 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.780001] WYT: affine with cpu 14 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.796001] WYT: affine with cpu 15 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.808001] WYT: affine with cpu 16 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.820001] WYT: affine with cpu 17 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.836001] WYT: affine with cpu 18 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.848001] WYT: affine with cpu 19 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.860001] WYT: affine with cpu 1a in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.876001] WYT: affine with cpu 1b in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.888001] WYT: affine with cpu 1c in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.900001] WYT: affine with cpu 1d in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.916001] WYT: affine with cpu 1e in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.928001] WYT: affine with cpu 1f in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.940001] WYT: affine with cpu 20 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.956001] WYT: affine with cpu 21 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.968001] WYT: affine with cpu 22 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 1.984001] WYT: affine with cpu 23 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 1.996001] WYT: affine with cpu 24 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 2.008002] WYT: affine with cpu 25 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > [ 2.024002] WYT: affine with cpu 26 in sd 6ce74000, weight 20 > [ 2.036001] WYT: affine with cpu 27 in sd 6cef3000, weight 40 > > -- > 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/ > -- 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