From: Con Kolivas <kernel@kolivas.org>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ck list <ck@vds.kolivas.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RSDL-mm 0/7] RSDL cpu scheduler for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:29:39 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200703121929.39702.kernel@kolivas.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200703121848.44714.kernel@kolivas.org>
On Monday 12 March 2007 18:48, Con Kolivas wrote:
> On Monday 12 March 2007 18:22, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-03-11 at 13:10 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > > > Full patch for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2:
> > > > > http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/staircase-deadline/2.6.21-rc3-mm2-rsd
> > > > >l- 0.29.patch
> > > >
> > > > I'm seeing a cpu distribution problem running this on my P4 box.
> > > >
> > > > With 2.6.21-rc3, X/Gforce maintain their ~50% cpu (remain smooth),
> > > > and the encoders (100%cpu bound) get whats left when Amarok isn't
> > > > eating it.
> > > >
> > > > I plunked the above patch into plain 2.6.21-rc3 and retested to
> > > > eliminate other mm tree differences, and it's repeatable. The nice 5
> > > > cpu hogs always receive considerably more that the nice 0 sleepers.
> > >
> > > hm. Do you get the same same problem on UP too? (i.e. lets eliminate
> > > any SMP/HT artifacts)
> >
> > Behavior is slightly different with a UP kernel. Neither encoder
> > receives more cpu than X, but they each still receive more than gforce.
> > The distribution of X/Gforce vs lame/lame averages per eyeball to
> > roughly ~50:50.
> >
> > I noticed Con posted an accounting fix, and applied it. No change.
>
> So the lames are nice 5 which means they should receive 75% of the cpu that
> nice 0 tasks receive so they should get 43% of the cpu...
>
> Just a couple of questions;
>
> The X/Gforce case; do they alternate cpu between them? By that I mean when
> they're the only thing running does the cpu load summate to 1 or does it
> summate to 2?
I'll save you the trouble. I just checked myself and indeed the load is only
1. What this means is that although there are 2 tasks running, only one is
running at any time making a total load of 1. So, if we add two other tasks
that add 2 more to the load the total load is 3. However if we weight the
other two tasks at nice 5, they only add .75 each to the load making a
weighted total of 2.5. This means that X+Gforce together should get a total
of 1/2.5 or 40% of the overall cpu. That sounds like exactly what you're
describing is happening.
--
-ck
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-12 8:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-11 3:57 [PATCH][RSDL-mm 0/7] RSDL cpu scheduler for 2.6.21-rc3-mm2 Con Kolivas
2007-03-11 11:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-11 11:48 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-11 12:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-11 12:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-11 12:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-11 21:18 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 7:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 7:48 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 8:29 ` Con Kolivas [this message]
2007-03-12 8:55 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 9:22 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 9:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 10:27 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 10:57 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 11:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-12 11:23 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 13:48 ` Theodore Tso
2007-03-12 18:09 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 14:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 15:26 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-03-12 18:10 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 19:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-12 20:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 4:17 ` Kyle Moffett
2007-03-13 8:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-12 18:49 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 19:06 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-03-13 17:21 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-03-12 20:11 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 20:38 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 20:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 22:51 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 5:10 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 5:53 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 6:08 ` [ck] " Rodney Gordon II
2007-03-13 6:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 7:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 8:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-13 8:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-13 8:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 9:21 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 9:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-13 9:41 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 10:50 ` Bill Huey
2007-03-13 9:31 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 10:24 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-03-13 23:19 ` Sanjoy Mahajan
2007-03-13 9:33 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 9:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-03-13 10:06 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 11:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 11:41 ` Serge Belyshev
2007-03-13 11:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 15:36 ` John Stoffel
2007-03-13 14:17 ` Matt Mackall
2007-03-13 15:15 ` David Schwartz
2007-03-13 17:59 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-03-13 19:58 ` David Schwartz
2007-03-13 20:10 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-03-13 20:35 ` Bill Huey
2007-03-13 20:27 ` Bill Huey
2007-03-16 16:42 ` Pavel Machek
2007-03-12 23:43 ` David Lang
2007-03-13 2:23 ` Lee Revell
2007-03-13 6:00 ` David Lang
2007-03-12 21:34 ` [ck] " jos poortvliet
2007-03-12 21:38 ` michael chang
2007-03-13 0:09 ` Thibaut VARENE
2007-03-13 6:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-13 6:16 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-13 6:30 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 20:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-03-12 21:05 ` Serge Belyshev
2007-03-12 21:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 11:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-12 9:38 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-03-12 10:34 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 16:38 ` Kasper Sandberg
2007-03-14 2:25 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2007-03-14 3:25 ` Gabriel C
2007-03-14 9:44 ` Xavier Bestel
2007-03-12 8:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-03-11 14:32 ` Gene Heskett
2007-03-12 6:58 ` Radoslaw Szkodzinski
2007-03-12 11:16 ` Gene Heskett
2007-03-12 11:49 ` Gene Heskett
2007-03-12 11:58 ` Con Kolivas
2007-03-12 16:38 ` Gene Heskett
2007-03-12 18:34 ` Gene Heskett
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-03-12 19:53 Al Boldi
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=200703121929.39702.kernel@kolivas.org \
--to=kernel@kolivas.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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.