All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Jason Garrett-Glaser <darkshikari@gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: newidle balancing in NUMA domain?
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:09:41 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1259086181.15249.117.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <28f2fcbc0911240924r708202cdx8bc7b465d473f283@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 09:24 -0800, Jason Garrett-Glaser wrote:
> > Quite a few being one test case, and on a program with a horrible
> > parallelism design (rapid heavy weight forks to distribute small
> > units of work).
> 
> > If x264 is declared dainbramaged, that's fine with me too.
> 
> We did multiple benchmarks using a thread pool and it did not help.

Yes, I see no way it possibly could make any difference.

Well, there is one thing.  We have this START_DEBIT thing, using a
thread pool avoids that very significant penalty.  WRT idle->busy again
time though, it can't make any difference.

> If you want to declare our app "braindamaged", feel free, but pooling
> threads to avoid re-creation gave no benefit whatsoever.  If you think
> the parallelism methodology is wrong as a whole, you're basically
> saying that Linux shouldn't be used for video compression, because
> this is the exact same threading model used by almost every single
> video encoder ever made.  There are actually a few that use
> slice-based threading, but those are actually even worse from your
> perspective, because slice-based threading spawns mulitple threads PER
> FRAME instead of one per frame.
> 
> Because of the inter-frame dependencies in video coding it is
> impossible to efficiently get a granularity of more than one thread
> per frame.  Pooling threads doesn't change the fact that you are
> conceptually creating a thread for each frame--it just eliminates the
> pthread_create call.  In theory you could do one thread per group of
> frames, but that is completely unrealistic for real-time encoding
> (e.g. streaming), requires a catastrophically large amount of memory,
> makes it impossible to track the bit buffer, and all other sorts of
> bad stuff.

I don't consider x264 to be braindamaged btw, I consider it to be a very
nice testcase for the scheduler.  As soon as I saw the problem it
highlighted so well, it became a permanent member of my collection.

	-Mike


  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-24 18:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-23 11:22 newidle balancing in NUMA domain? Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 11:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-23 11:43   ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 11:50     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-23 12:16       ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 11:45   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-23 12:01     ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 12:08       ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-23 12:27         ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 12:46           ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-24  6:36             ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-24 17:24               ` Jason Garrett-Glaser
2009-11-24 18:09                 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-11-30  8:19                 ` Nick Piggin
2009-12-01  8:18                   ` Jason Garrett-Glaser
2009-11-23 14:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-23 15:11   ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 15:21     ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-23 15:29       ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 15:37         ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-11-24  6:54           ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 15:53         ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-24  6:53           ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-24  8:40             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-24  8:58               ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-24  9:11                 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-30  8:27                   ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-23 17:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-24  6:59           ` Nick Piggin
2009-11-24  9:16             ` Ingo Molnar

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=1259086181.15249.117.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=darkshikari@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=npiggin@suse.de \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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.