All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "lookeylam" <lookeylam@gmail.com>
To: "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: About CPU's Load Balance and CFS functions
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2009 16:14:37 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200909071614346093582@gmail.com> (raw)

Hello:
         I am  not sure this  is the right maillist to ask this question. I just have a try.
         I have a test on Dell 1950 with 8 cpus on board for testing the apache by ab command. And I find that in 
         linux 2.6.18. The processes forked by apache are not well distributed on these 8 cpus.
         linux 2.6.23 is a little better than 2.6.18, but still some cpus are running busy and some cpus remains idle.
         While in  2.6.30, these 8 cpus are well used and the percentage of each cpu is nearly the same. And when I 
         start the control group with cpuset type with sched_relax_domain_level( with value 3,4,5). The result of ab is 50ms better than test results without control group. 
        
         I attribute this situation to to load_balance but not CFS, because CFS is just a scheduler for orgnizing the process inside one cpu, while load_balance is the main character to control the process and load between different cpus.
         But when i give out this conclusion, I confuse about the differences of these three kernels of load_balance.
         
         My questions are the above conclusion  is right or not? How would these situation happen and why? I read the code of the kernel but I am still not sure.
        
        Thanks.
 				


             reply	other threads:[~2009-09-07  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-07  8:14 lookeylam [this message]
2009-09-07 19:19 ` About CPU's Load Balance and CFS functions Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-08  6:55   ` 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=200909071614346093582@gmail.com \
    --to=lookeylam@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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.