Re: CFS review

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On Sat, 11 Aug 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> the only relevant thing that comes to mind at the moment is that last 
> week Peter noticed a buggy aspect of sleeper bonuses (in that we do not 
> rate-limit their output, hence we 'waste' them instead of redistributing 
> them), and i've got the small patch below in my queue to fix that - 
> could you give it a try?

It doesn't make much of a difference. OTOH if I disabled the sleeper code 
completely in __update_curr(), I get this:

  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
 3139 roman     20   0  1796  344  256 R 21.7  0.3   0:02.68 lt
 3138 roman     20   0  1796  344  256 R 21.7  0.3   0:02.68 lt
 3137 roman     20   0  1796  520  432 R 21.7  0.4   0:02.68 lt
 3136 roman     20   0  1532  268  216 R 34.5  0.2   0:06.82 l

Disabling this code completely via sched_features makes only a minor 
difference:

  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
 3139 roman     20   0  1796  344  256 R 20.4  0.3   0:09.94 lt
 3138 roman     20   0  1796  344  256 R 20.4  0.3   0:09.94 lt
 3137 roman     20   0  1796  520  432 R 20.4  0.4   0:09.94 lt
 3136 roman     20   0  1532  268  216 R 39.1  0.2   0:19.20 l

> this is just a blind stab into the dark - i couldnt see any real impact 
> from that patch in various workloads (and it's not upstream yet), so it 
> might not make a big difference.

Can we please skip to the point, where you try to explain the intention a 
little more?
If I had to guess that this is supposed to keep the runtime balance, then 
it would be better to use wait_runtime to adjust fair_clock, from where it 
would be evenly distributed to all tasks (but this had to be done during 
enqueue and dequeue). OTOH this also had then a consequence for the wait 
queue, as fair_clock is used to calculate fair_key.
IMHO current wait_runtime should have some influence in calculating the 
sleep bonus, so that wait_runtime doesn't constantly overflow for tasks 
which only run occasionally.

bye, Roman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[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]
  Powered by Linux