From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jan Glauber <jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:11:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1187687476.7623.8.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070821084243.GB1144@elte.hu>
On Tue, 2007-08-21 at 10:42 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > Am Montag, 20. August 2007 schrieb Ingo Molnar:
> > > could you send that precise sched_clock() patch? It should be an order
> > > of magnitude simpler than the high-precision stime/utime tracking you
> > > already do, and it's needed for quality scheduling anyway.
> >
> > I have a question about that. I just played with sched_clock, and even
> > when I intentionally slow down sched_clock by a factor of 2, my cpu
> > bound process gets 100 % in top. If this is intentional, I dont
> > understand how a virtualized sched_clock would fix the accounting
> > change?
>
> hm, does on s390 scheduler_tick() get driven in virtual time or in real
> time? The very latest scheduler code will enforce a minimum rate of
> sched_clock() across two scheduler_tick() calls (in rc3 and later
> kernels). If sched_clock() "slows down" but scheduler_tick() still has a
> real-time frequency then that impacts the quality of scheduling. So
> scheduler_tick() and sched_clock() must really have the same behavior
> (either both are virtual or both are real), so that scheduling becomes
> invariant to steal-time.
scheduler_tick() is based on the HZ timer which uses the TOD clock =
real time. sched_clock() currently uses the TOD clock as well so in
regard to the new scheduler we currently do not have a problem. We have
a problem with cpu time accounting, the change to the /proc code breaks
the precise accounting on s390. To solve the cpu time accounting we need
to change sched_clock() to the cpu timer = virtual time. To change the
scheduler_tick() as well requires another patch and I fear it would
complicate things in the s390 backend.
And if you say that the scheduling becomes invariant to steal-time, how
is the cpu time accounting via sum_exec supposed to work if it does not
take steal-time into account ?
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-21 9:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-12 16:32 [git pull request] scheduler updates Ingo Molnar
2007-08-14 8:37 ` [accounting regression since rc1] " Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-16 8:17 ` [PATCH][RFC] Re: accounting regression since rc1 Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-20 15:45 ` [accounting regression since rc1] scheduler updates Ingo Molnar
2007-08-20 17:03 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-20 18:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-20 18:33 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-20 19:00 ` Balbir Singh
2007-08-20 19:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 7:20 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-20 19:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 7:00 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 9:18 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-20 23:07 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-08-21 2:18 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-21 7:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 10:07 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-21 10:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 11:15 ` Andi Kleen
2007-08-21 11:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 8:17 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 8:42 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 9:11 ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2007-08-21 9:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 9:48 ` Paul Mackerras
2007-08-21 10:38 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-21 11:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 11:58 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-21 10:39 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 10:43 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 11:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 11:24 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 11:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 11:58 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-21 12:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-21 12:57 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2007-08-21 11:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-22 7:50 ` Christian Borntraeger
2007-08-22 7:59 ` Ingo Molnar
[not found] ` <200708141032.47235.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
[not found] ` <alpine.LFD.0.999.0708140835240.30176@woody.linux-foundation.org>
2007-08-14 18:19 ` Christian Borntraeger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1187687476.7623.8.camel@localhost \
--to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=jang@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.