From: Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:00:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <513EC47E.9040602@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130311094031.GA14221@gmail.com>
On 03/11/2013 05:40 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Michael Wang <wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi, Ingo
>>
>> On 03/11/2013 04:21 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> I have actually written the prctl() approach before, for instrumentation
>>> purposes, and it does wonders to system analysis.
>>
>> The idea sounds great, we could get many new info to implement more
>> smart scheduler, that's amazing :)
>>
>>>
>>> Any objections?
>>
>> Just one concern, may be I have misunderstand you, but will it cause
>> trouble if the prctl() was indiscriminately used by some applications,
>> will we get fake data?
>
> It's their problem: overusing it will increase their CPU overhead. The two
> boundary worst-cases are that they either call it too frequently or too
> rarely:
>
> - too frequently: it approximates the current cpu-runtime work metric
>
> - too infrequently: we just ignore it and fall back to a runtime metric
> if it does not change.
>
> It's not like it can be used to get preferential treatment - we don't ever
> balance other tasks against these tasks based on work throughput, we try
> to maximize this workload's work throughput.
>
> What could happen is if an app is 'optimized' for a buggy scheduler by
> changing the work metric frequency. We offer no guarantee - apps will be
> best off (and users will be least annoyed) if apps honestly report their
> work metric.
>
> Instrumentation/stats/profiling will also double check the correctness of
> this data: if developers/users start relying on the work metric as a
> substitute benchmark number, then app writers will have an additional
> incentive to make them correct.
I see, I could not figure out how to wisely using the info currently,
but I have the feeling that it will make scheduler very different ;-)
May be we could implement the API and get those info ready firstly
(along with the new sched-pipe which provide work tick info), then think
about the way to use them in scheduler, is there any patches on the way?
Regards,
Michael Wang
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-12 6:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-06 7:06 [PATCH] sched: wakeup buddy Michael Wang
2013-03-07 8:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-07 9:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 2:37 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 6:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-08 7:30 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-08 8:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-03-11 2:42 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 9:46 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 16:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:31 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 8:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-11 9:14 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 9:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 6:00 ` Michael Wang [this message]
2013-03-12 8:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-03-12 9:41 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:33 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-07 17:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-08 2:50 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-11 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-12 3:23 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-12 10:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-13 3:07 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-14 10:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-03-15 6:24 ` Michael Wang
2013-03-18 3:26 ` Michael Wang
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=513EC47E.9040602@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=wangyun@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=pjt@google.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.