From: "Chris Friesen" <cfriesen@nortel.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
mingo@elte.hu, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, pj@sgi.com
Subject: fair group scheduler not so fair?
Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 17:59:22 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4834B75A.40900@nortel.com> (raw)
I just downloaded the current git head and started playing with the fair
group scheduler. (This is on a dual cpu Mac G5.)
I created two groups, "a" and "b". Each of them was left with the
default share of 1024.
I created three cpu hogs by doing "cat /dev/zero > /dev/null". One hog
(pid 2435) was put into group "a", while the other two were put into
group "b".
After giving them time to settle down, "top" showed the following:
2438 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 99.5 0.0 4:02.82 cat
2435 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 65.9 0.0 3:30.94 cat
2437 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 34.3 0.0 3:14.89 cat
Where pid 2435 should have gotten a whole cpu worth of time, it actually
only got 66% of a cpu. Is this expected behaviour?
I then redid the test with two hogs in one group and three hogs in the
other group. Unfortunately, the cpu shares were not equally distributed
within each group. Using a 10-sec interval in "top", I got the following:
2522 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 52.2 0.0 1:33.38 cat
2523 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 48.9 0.0 1:37.85 cat
2524 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 37.0 0.0 1:23.22 cat
2525 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 32.6 0.0 1:22.62 cat
2559 cfriesen 20 0 3800 392 336 R 28.7 0.0 0:24.30 cat
Do we expect to see upwards of 9% relative unfairness between processes
within a class?
I tried messing with the tuneables in /proc/sys/kernel
(sched_latency_ns, sched_migration_cost, sched_min_granularity_ns) but
was unable to significantly improve these results.
Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Chris
next reply other threads:[~2008-05-22 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-21 23:59 Chris Friesen [this message]
2008-05-22 6:56 ` fair group scheduler not so fair? Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-22 20:02 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-22 20:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-22 20:18 ` Li, Tong N
2008-05-22 21:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-23 0:17 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-23 7:44 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-23 9:42 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-23 9:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-23 10:19 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-23 10:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-27 17:15 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-27 18:13 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-28 16:33 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-28 18:35 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-28 18:47 ` Dhaval Giani
2008-05-29 2:50 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-29 16:46 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-29 16:47 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-29 21:30 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-30 6:43 ` Dhaval Giani
2008-05-30 10:21 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-05-30 11:36 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2008-06-02 20:03 ` Chris Friesen
2008-05-27 17:28 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
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=4834B75A.40900@nortel.com \
--to=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=pj@sgi.com \
--cc=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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.