[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130626155048.GA7399@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 17:50:48 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@...ine.de>,
Dave Chiluk <chiluk@...onical.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Scheduler accounting inflated for io bound processes.
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:37:13AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Would be very nice to randomize the sampling rate, by randomizing the
> > intervals within a 1% range or so - perf tooling will probably recognize
> > the different weights.
>
> You're suggesting adding noise to the regular kernel tick?
No, to the perf interval (which I assumed Mike was using to profile this?)
- although slightly randomizing the kernel tick might make sense as well,
especially if it's hrtimer driven and reprogrammed anyway.
I might have gotten it all wrong though ...
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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