public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ashwin Chaugule <ashwin.chaugule@celunite.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Swap token re-tuned
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 16:30:07 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1159786807.5574.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1159774552.13651.80.camel@lappy>

On Mon, 2006-10-02 at 09:35 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> Being frustrated with these results - I mean the idea made sense, so
> what is going on - I came up with this answer:
> 
> Tasks owning the swap token will retain their pages and will hence swap
> less, other (contending) tasks will get less pages and will fault more
> frequent. This prio mechanism will favour exactly those tasks not
> holding the token. Which makes for token bouncing.
> 
Right. But, with the token bouncing around, effectively the RSS of the
processes at that time will keep increasing, and they should be able to
spend more time on execution than i/o. And meanwhile the priorities of
the tasks that were contending for the token, but didnt get it, will
increment. So since the fairness is preserved, all the tasks should get
their fair share for execution and it should result in a speedup as
compared to the current upstream implementation. I took a time
instrumentation of the vanilla 2.6.18 kernel build with -j 4 and I've
posted up the results in the previous mail. I'm testing on an ibm t42
1.69Ghz 64M system.

> So while I agree it would be nice to get rid of all magic variables
> (holding time in the current impl) this proposed solution hasn't
> convinced me (for one it introduces another).
> 
> (for the interrested, the various attempts I tried are available here:
>   http://programming.kicks-ass.net/kernel-patches/swap_token/ )

Cool!

Had you applied these patches when you posted your test results ?


Thanks
Ashwin



  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-10-02 11:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-09-29 18:41 [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Swap token re-tuned Ashwin Chaugule
2006-10-01 22:56 ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-02  7:35   ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-02  7:59     ` Andrew Morton
2006-10-02  8:14       ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-03  7:32       ` Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-08 20:23       ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] grab swap token reordered Ashwin Chaugule
2006-10-08 20:28       ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] new scheme to preempt swap token Ashwin Chaugule
2006-10-02 11:00     ` Ashwin Chaugule [this message]
2006-10-02 11:08       ` [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Swap token re-tuned Peter Zijlstra
2006-10-02  8:20   ` Ashwin Chaugule
2006-10-02 10:00   ` Ashwin Chaugule

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=1159786807.5574.14.camel@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=ashwin.chaugule@celunite.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox