linux-kernel - Re: [patch v4 0/18] sched: simplified fork, release load avg and power awareness scheduling

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:	Tue, 29 Jan 2013 09:32:48 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
CC:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, pjt@...gle.com,
	namhyung@...nel.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
	viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v4 0/18] sched: simplified fork, release load avg and
 power awareness scheduling


>> then the above no_node-load_balance thing suffers a small-ish dip at 320
>> tasks, yeah.
> 
> No no, that's not restricted to one node.  It's just overloaded because
> I turned balancing off at the NODE domain level.
> 
>> And AFAICR, the effect of disabling boosting will be visible in the
>> small count tasks cases anyway because if you saturate the cores with
>> tasks, the boosting algorithms tend to get the box out of boosting for
>> the simple reason that the power/perf headroom simply disappears due to
>> the SOC being busy.
>>
>>> 640     100294.8        98      38.7    570.9   2.6118
>>> 1280    115998.2        97      66.9    1132.8  1.5104
>>> 2560    125820.0        97      123.3   2256.6  0.8191
>>
>> I dunno about those. maybe this is expected with so many tasks or do we
>> want to optimize that case further?
> 
> When using all 4 nodes properly, that's still scaling.  Here, I

Without node regular balancing, only waking balance left in
select_task_rq_fair for aim7 testing, (I just assume you used shared
workfile, most of testing is cpu density and only few exec/fork load).

Since, waking balance just happened in same llc domain. guess that is
the reason for this.

> intentionally screwed up balancing to watch the low end.  High end is
> expected wreckage.


--
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/