From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler to solve complex scheduling problems
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 13:23:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110417112325.GN31407@erda.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1303030412.2035.52.camel@laptop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1906 bytes --]
On 17.04.11 04:53:32, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 10:18 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > So with 6 counters it would be a loop of 720, with 8 counters a loop of 40320,
> > with 10 counters a loop of 3628800 ... O(n!) is not fun.
>
> Right, and we'll hit this case at least once when scheduling a
> over-committed system. Intel Sandy Bridge can have 8 counters per core +
> 3 fixed counters, giving an n=11 situation. You do _NOT_ want to have
> one 39916800 cycle loop before we determine the PMU isn't schedulable,
> that's simply unacceptable.
Of course it is not that much as the algorithm is already optimized
and we only walk through possible ways. Also, the more constraints we
have the less we have to walk. So lets assume a worst case of 8
unconstraint counters, I reimplemented the algorithm in the perl
script attached and counted 251 loops, following numbers I got
depending on the number of counters:
$ perl counter-scheduling.pl | grep Num
Number of counters: 2, loops: 10, redos: 4, ratio: 2.5
Number of counters: 3, loops: 26, redos: 7, ratio: 3.7
Number of counters: 4, loops: 53, redos: 11, ratio: 4.8
Number of counters: 5, loops: 89, redos: 15, ratio: 5.9
Number of counters: 6, loops: 134, redos: 19, ratio: 7.1
Number of counters: 7, loops: 188, redos: 23, ratio: 8.2
Number of counters: 8, loops: 251, redos: 27, ratio: 9.3
Number of counters: 9, loops: 323, redos: 31, ratio: 10.4
Number of counters: 10, loops: 404, redos: 35, ratio: 11.5
Number of counters: 11, loops: 494, redos: 39, ratio: 12.7
Number of counters: 12, loops: 593, redos: 43, ratio: 13.8
It seems the algorithm is about number-of-counter times slower than
the current. I think this is worth some further considerations. There
is also some room for improvement with my algorithm.
-Robert
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center
[-- Attachment #2: counter-scheduling.pl --]
[-- Type: text/x-perl, Size: 984 bytes --]
#! /usr/bin/perl
#$num_ctrs = 11;
for ($num_ctrs = 2; $num_ctrs <= 12; $num_ctrs++) {
$num_events = $num_ctrs + 1;
@sched_log = ();
$scheduled = 0;
$used_mask = 0;
$loops = 0;
$redos = 0;
$scheduled = 0;
while ($scheduled < $num_events) {
for ($idx = $sched_log[$scheduled] || 0; $idx < $num_ctrs; $idx++)
{
$loops++;
last if !((1 << $idx) & $used_mask);
}
if ($idx == $num_ctrs) {
printf "Failed to schedule event #%d\n", $scheduled;
last if (!$scheduled);
$sched_log[$scheduled] = 0;
$scheduled--;
$idx = $sched_log[$scheduled];
$sched_log[$scheduled]++;
$used_mask &= ~(1 << $idx);
printf "Rollback event #%d on counter #%d\n", $scheduled, $idx;
$redos++;
redo;
}
$used_mask |= (1 << $idx);
push @sched_log, $idx;
printf "Scheduling event #%d on counter #%d\n", $scheduled, $idx;
$scheduled++;
}
printf("Number of counters: %2d, loops: %3d, redos: %3d, ratio: %.1f\n",
$num_ctrs, $loops, $redos, $loops / $redos);
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-17 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-16 0:27 [PATCH 0/4] perf, x86: Fixes for v2.6.39 Robert Richter
2011-04-16 0:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] perf, x86: Fix pre-defined cache-misses event for AMD family 15h cpus Robert Richter
2011-04-19 12:03 ` [tip:perf/urgent] " tip-bot for Andre Przywara
2011-04-16 0:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf, x86: Fix AMD family 15h FPU event constraints Robert Richter
2011-04-19 12:04 ` [tip:perf/urgent] " tip-bot for Robert Richter
2011-04-16 0:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] perf, x86: Use ALTERNATIVE() to check for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE Robert Richter
2011-04-18 20:00 ` Andi Kleen
2011-04-19 10:39 ` Robert Richter
2011-04-19 18:21 ` Andi Kleen
2011-04-19 12:04 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Robert Richter
2011-04-16 0:27 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler to solve complex scheduling problems Robert Richter
2011-04-16 8:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-16 9:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-16 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-16 10:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-16 10:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-16 14:26 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-04-17 8:15 ` Robert Richter
2011-04-17 8:18 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-17 8:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-17 11:23 ` Robert Richter [this message]
2011-04-18 8:17 ` Robert Richter
2011-04-16 15:52 ` Stephane Eranian
2011-04-17 8:44 ` Robert Richter
2011-04-17 9:05 ` Stephane Eranian
2011-04-19 10:26 ` [PATCH v2] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler for constraints with overlapping counters Robert Richter
2011-04-19 11:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-04-19 13:55 ` Robert Richter
2011-04-28 9:50 ` Robert Richter
2011-05-18 21:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-18 21:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-18 21:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-05-19 10:49 ` Robert Richter
2011-05-19 18:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-05-20 3:18 ` Robert Richter
2011-09-01 12:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-09-01 14:12 ` Robert Richter
2011-09-01 16:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20110417112325.GN31407@erda.amd.com \
--to=robert.richter@amd.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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.