Ingo,
Volanomark slows by 80% with CFS scheduler on 2.6.23-rc1.
Benchmark was run on a 2 socket Core2 machine.
The change in scheduler treatment of sched_yield
could play a part in changing Volanomark behavior.
In CFS, sched_yield is implemented
by dequeueing and requeueing a process . The time a process
has spent running probably reduced the the cpu time due it
by only a bit. The process could get re-queued pretty close
to head of the queue, and may get scheduled again pretty
quickly if there is still a lot of cpu time due.
It may make sense to queue the
yielding process a bit further behind in the queue.
I made a slight change by zeroing out wait_runtime
(i.e. have the process gives
up cpu time due for it to run) for experimentation.
Let's put aside gripes that Volanomark should have used a
better mechanism to coordinate threads instead sched_yield for
a second. Volanomark runs better
and is only 40% (instead of 80%) down from old scheduler
without CFS.
Of course we should not tune for Volanomark and this is
reference data.
What are your view on how CFS's sched_yield should behave?
Regards,
Tim
--- linux-2.6.23-rc1/kernel/sched_fair.c.orig 2007-07-27 09:39:11.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc1/kernel/sched_fair.c 2007-07-27 09:40:41.000000000 -0700
@@ -841,6 +841,7 @@
* position within the tree:
*/
dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, &p->se, 0, now);
+ p->se.wait_runtime = 0;
enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, &p->se, 0, now);
}
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
