From: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, 'Nick Piggin' <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Delete scheduler SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE flags
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 23:08:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200507282308.j6SN8Tg01993@unix-os.sc.intel.com> (raw)
What sort of workload needs SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE?
SD_WAKE_AFFINE are not useful in conjunction with interrupt binding.
In fact, it creates more harm than usefulness, causing detrimental
process migration and destroy process cache affinity etc. Also
SD_WAKE_BALANCE is giving us performance grief with our industry
standard OLTP workload.
To demonstrate the problem, we turned off these two flags in the cpu
sd domain and measured a stunning 2.15% performance gain! And deleting
all the code in the try_to_wake_up() pertain to load balancing gives us
another 0.2% gain.
The wake up patch should be made simple, just put the waking task on
the previously ran cpu runqueue. Simple and elegant.
I'm proposing we either delete these two flags or make them run time
configurable.
- Ken
--- linux-2.6.12/include/linux/topology.h.orig 2005-07-28 15:54:05.007399685 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.12/include/linux/topology.h 2005-07-28 15:54:39.292555515 -0700
@@ -118,9 +118,7 @@
.flags = SD_LOAD_BALANCE \
| SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE \
| SD_BALANCE_EXEC \
- | SD_WAKE_AFFINE \
- | SD_WAKE_IDLE \
- | SD_WAKE_BALANCE, \
+ | SD_WAKE_IDLE, \
.last_balance = jiffies, \
.balance_interval = 1, \
.nr_balance_failed = 0, \
next reply other threads:[~2005-07-28 23:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-07-28 23:08 Chen, Kenneth W [this message]
2005-07-28 23:34 ` Delete scheduler SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE flags Nick Piggin
2005-07-28 23:48 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 1:25 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-29 1:39 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 1:46 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-29 1:53 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 2:01 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-29 6:27 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-29 8:48 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-29 8:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 8:59 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-29 9:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 9:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 16:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 11:48 ` [patch] remove wake-balancing Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 14:13 ` [sched, patch] better wake-balancing Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 15:02 ` [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #2 Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 16:21 ` [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #3 Ingo Molnar
2005-07-30 0:08 ` Nick Piggin
2005-07-30 7:19 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-31 1:15 ` Nick Piggin
2005-08-01 17:13 ` Siddha, Suresh B
2005-08-08 23:18 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-07-30 23:26 ` [sched, patch] better wake-balancing, #2 Chuck Ebbert
2005-07-31 4:35 ` Con Kolivas
2005-07-31 6:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-07-31 13:35 ` Chuck Ebbert
2005-07-29 11:26 ` Delete scheduler SD_WAKE_AFFINE and SD_WAKE_BALANCE flags Ingo Molnar
2005-07-29 17:30 ` Chen, Kenneth W
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=200507282308.j6SN8Tg01993@unix-os.sc.intel.com \
--to=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox