From: alex.shi@intel.com (Alex Shi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] sched: pack small tasks
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:57:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50CADBDF.60305@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1355471146.7641.13.camel@marge.simpson.net>
On 12/14/2012 03:45 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 14:36 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> On 12/14/2012 12:45 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>>> Do you have further ideas for buddy cpu on such example?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which kind of sched_domain configuration have you for such system ?
>>>>>>> and how many sched_domain level have you ?
>>>>>
>>>>> it is general X86 domain configuration. with 4 levels,
>>>>> sibling/core/cpu/numa.
>>> CPU is a bug that slipped into domain degeneration. You should have
>>> SIBLING/MC/NUMA (chasing that down is on todo).
>>
>> Maybe.
>> the CPU/NUMA is different on domain flags, CPU has SD_PREFER_SIBLING.
>
> What I noticed during (an unrelated) bisection on a 40 core box was
> domains going from so..
>
> 3.4.0-bisect (virgin)
> [ 5.056214] CPU0 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 5.065009] domain 0: span 0,32 level SIBLING
> [ 5.075011] groups: 0 (cpu_power = 589) 32 (cpu_power = 589)
> [ 5.088381] domain 1: span 0,4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60,64,68,72,76 level MC
> [ 5.107669] groups: 0,32 (cpu_power = 1178) 4,36 (cpu_power = 1178) 8,40 (cpu_power = 1178) 12,44 (cpu_power = 1178)
> 16,48 (cpu_power = 1177) 20,52 (cpu_power = 1178) 24,56 (cpu_power = 1177) 28,60 (cpu_power = 1177)
> 64,72 (cpu_power = 1176) 68,76 (cpu_power = 1176)
> [ 5.162115] domain 2: span 0-79 level NODE
> [ 5.171927] groups: 0,4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60,64,68,72,76 (cpu_power = 11773)
> 1,5,9,13,17,21,25,29,33,37,41,45,49,53,57,61,65,69,73,77 (cpu_power = 11772)
> 2,6,10,14,18,22,26,30,34,38,42,46,50,54,58,62,66,70,74,78 (cpu_power = 11773)
> 3,7,11,15,19,23,27,31,35,39,43,47,51,55,59,63,67,71,75,79 (cpu_power = 11770)
>
> ..to so, which looks a little bent. CPU and MC have identical spans, so
> CPU should have gone away, as it used to do.
>
better to remove one, and believe you can make it. :)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <bitbucket@online.de>
Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, pjt@google.com,
santosh.shilimkar@ti.com, Morten.Rasmussen@arm.com,
chander.kashyap@linaro.org, cmetcalf@tilera.com,
tony.luck@intel.com, preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
len.brown@intel.com, arjan@linux.intel.com,
amit.kucheria@linaro.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] sched: pack small tasks
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 15:57:19 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50CADBDF.60305@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1355471146.7641.13.camel@marge.simpson.net>
On 12/14/2012 03:45 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 14:36 +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>> On 12/14/2012 12:45 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>>>> Do you have further ideas for buddy cpu on such example?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which kind of sched_domain configuration have you for such system ?
>>>>>>> and how many sched_domain level have you ?
>>>>>
>>>>> it is general X86 domain configuration. with 4 levels,
>>>>> sibling/core/cpu/numa.
>>> CPU is a bug that slipped into domain degeneration. You should have
>>> SIBLING/MC/NUMA (chasing that down is on todo).
>>
>> Maybe.
>> the CPU/NUMA is different on domain flags, CPU has SD_PREFER_SIBLING.
>
> What I noticed during (an unrelated) bisection on a 40 core box was
> domains going from so..
>
> 3.4.0-bisect (virgin)
> [ 5.056214] CPU0 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 5.065009] domain 0: span 0,32 level SIBLING
> [ 5.075011] groups: 0 (cpu_power = 589) 32 (cpu_power = 589)
> [ 5.088381] domain 1: span 0,4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60,64,68,72,76 level MC
> [ 5.107669] groups: 0,32 (cpu_power = 1178) 4,36 (cpu_power = 1178) 8,40 (cpu_power = 1178) 12,44 (cpu_power = 1178)
> 16,48 (cpu_power = 1177) 20,52 (cpu_power = 1178) 24,56 (cpu_power = 1177) 28,60 (cpu_power = 1177)
> 64,72 (cpu_power = 1176) 68,76 (cpu_power = 1176)
> [ 5.162115] domain 2: span 0-79 level NODE
> [ 5.171927] groups: 0,4,8,12,16,20,24,28,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,60,64,68,72,76 (cpu_power = 11773)
> 1,5,9,13,17,21,25,29,33,37,41,45,49,53,57,61,65,69,73,77 (cpu_power = 11772)
> 2,6,10,14,18,22,26,30,34,38,42,46,50,54,58,62,66,70,74,78 (cpu_power = 11773)
> 3,7,11,15,19,23,27,31,35,39,43,47,51,55,59,63,67,71,75,79 (cpu_power = 11770)
>
> ..to so, which looks a little bent. CPU and MC have identical spans, so
> CPU should have gone away, as it used to do.
>
better to remove one, and believe you can make it. :)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-14 7:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-12 13:31 [RFC PATCH v2 0/6] sched: packing small tasks Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` RFC PATCH v2 1/6] Revert "sched: introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED dependency for load-tracking" Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` [PATCH 2/6] sched: add a new SD SHARE_POWERLINE flag for sched_domain Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 2:24 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 2:24 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 8:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 8:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] sched: pack small tasks Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 2:17 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 2:17 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 2:43 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 2:43 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 10:11 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 10:11 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 14:25 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 14:25 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-13 14:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 14:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 15:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-13 15:48 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-14 1:46 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 1:46 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 9:33 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-14 9:33 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-16 7:12 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-16 7:12 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-17 9:40 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-17 9:40 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-17 15:24 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-17 15:24 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-18 9:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-18 9:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-18 11:29 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-18 11:29 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 4:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-14 4:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-14 6:36 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 6:36 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 7:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-14 7:45 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-14 7:57 ` Alex Shi [this message]
2012-12-14 7:57 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-14 10:43 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-14 10:43 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-15 6:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-15 6:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2012-12-17 3:13 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-17 3:13 ` Alex Shi
2012-12-21 5:47 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-12-21 5:47 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-12-21 8:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-21 8:53 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-21 8:59 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-21 8:59 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] sched: secure access to other CPU statistics Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/6] sched: pack the idle load balance Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/6] ARM: sched: clear SD_SHARE_POWERLINE Vincent Guittot
2012-12-12 13:31 ` Vincent Guittot
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=50CADBDF.60305@intel.com \
--to=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.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.