[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424165219.GX11096@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 18:52:19 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, alex.shi@...aro.org,
preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, efault@....de,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, morten.rasmussen@....com, aswin@...com,
chegu_vinod@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] sched, fair: Stop searching for tasks in newidle
balance if there are runnable tasks
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:43:09AM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> If the below patch is what you were referring to, I believe this
> can help too. This was also something that I was testing out before
> we went with those patches which compares avg_idle with idle balance
> cost. I recall seeing somewhere around a +7% performance improvement
> in at least least 1 of the AIM7 workloads. I can do some more testing
> with this.
Yes, exactly that.
I can't remember the details, but I suspect we feared the less agressive
idle balance due to that patch (it will only pull a single task, instead
of multiple) would cause more idle_balance invocations and thereby
decrease throughput.
So I suppose something with _many_ bursty threads which leads to severe
inequalities would be the workload to trigger that.
Not sure we've ever seen that.. maybe Mike remembers, he seems to have a
head for such details.
--
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