From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@hp.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: boot-time slowdown for measure_migration_cost
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 20:00:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060130200026.GA5081@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060130192438.GA29129@elte.hu>
On Mon, Jan 30, 2006 at 08:24:38PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Doing both gets the time down to 5.20s, and the migration_cost™90.
>
> ok, that's good enough i think - we could certainly do the patch below
> in v2.6.16.
Might it be wise to see whether the 2% variation that I saw can be
repeated on some other architecture? Bjorn's initial post was just
questioning whether we need to spend this much time during boot to acquire
this data. Now we have *one* data point that on an ia64 with four cpus
with 9MB cache in a single domain that we can speed the calculation by
a factor of three with only a 2% loss of accuracy. Can someone else try
this patch and post the before/after values for migration_cost from dmesg?
-Tony
---
reduce the amount of time the migration cost calculations cost during
bootup.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
--- linux/kernel/sched.c.orig
+++ linux/kernel/sched.c
@@ -5141,7 +5141,7 @@ static void init_sched_build_groups(stru
#define SEARCH_SCOPE 2
#define MIN_CACHE_SIZE (64*1024U)
#define DEFAULT_CACHE_SIZE (5*1024*1024U)
-#define ITERATIONS 2
+#define ITERATIONS 1
#define SIZE_THRESH 130
#define COST_THRESH 130
@@ -5480,9 +5480,9 @@ static unsigned long long measure_migrat
break;
}
/*
- * Increase the cachesize in 5% steps:
+ * Increase the cachesize in 10% steps:
*/
- size = size * 20 / 19;
+ size = size * 10 / 9;
}
if (migration_debug)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-30 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-27 21:03 boot-time slowdown for measure_migration_cost Bjorn Helgaas
2006-01-27 21:48 ` Luck, Tony
2006-01-27 22:08 ` Prarit Bhargava
2006-01-30 17:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-01-30 18:53 ` Luck, Tony
2006-01-30 19:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-01-30 20:00 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2006-01-30 20:43 ` Prarit Bhargava
2006-01-30 20:52 ` Prarit Bhargava
2006-01-30 20:43 ` John Hawkes
2006-01-30 19:26 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-02-01 0:50 ` Chuck Ebbert
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=20060130200026.GA5081@agluck-lia64.sc.intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=bjorn.helgaas@hp.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox