From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [revert] mysql+oltp regression
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2008 09:19:42 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <48A03C6E.60303@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080811131400.GA909@elte.hu>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2090 bytes --]
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>> Speaking of this: Another patch I submitted to you Ingo (had to do
>>>> with updating the load_weight inside task_setprio) seems to also
>>>> have this phenomenon: e.g. its technically correct but further
>>>> testing has revealed negative repercussions elsewhere. So please
>>>> ignore that patch (or revert if you already pulled in, but I don't
>>>> think you have). Ill try to look into this issue as well.
>>>>
>>> ok, under which thread/subject is that? Not queued in tip/sched/*
>>> yet, correct?
>>>
>>>
>> Here is the original thread:
>>
>> http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/7/3/416
>>
>> I do not believe you have queued it anywhere (public anyway) yet.
>>
>> Note I have already invalidated 1/2, and now I am retracting 2/2 as
>> well. (1/2 is actually a bogus patch, 2/2 is "technically correct"
>> but causes ripples in the load balancer that need to be sorted out
>> first.
>>
>
> ok, thanks. I'm curious, what are those ripple effects? Stability or
> performance?
>
Performance. I found it while working on my pi series (which fyi I
should have a v2 refresh for soon, probably today...i am hoping to get
some review feedback from you on that as well, time permitting of course ;).
Basically the behavior I was observing was that kernel builds via distcc
would cluster all the cc1 jobs on a single core. At first I thought my
pi-series was screwed up, but then I realized I had applied the patch
referenced above earlier in my development tree, and removing it allowed
pi to work fine.
I found the problem with in once boot cycle with ftrace (thanks
Steve!). Basically newidle balancing was always returning "no
imbalance" even though I had 32 cc1 threads on 1 core, and 3 idle
cores. Clearly not correct! So I think that by adjusting the load up,
we throw off the hysteresis built into the load averages and cause the
system to incorrectly think it's balanced. TBD.
-Greg
> Ingo
>
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 257 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-11 13:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-11 11:32 [revert] mysql+oltp regression Mike Galbraith
2008-08-11 11:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 12:27 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-08-11 12:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 12:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 13:03 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-08-11 13:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 13:19 ` Gregory Haskins [this message]
2008-08-11 13:27 ` Gregory Haskins
2008-08-11 13:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-08-11 13:29 ` 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=48A03C6E.60303@novell.com \
--to=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--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.