From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
To: mingo@elte.hu
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:01:27 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1185573687.19777.44.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1141 bytes --]
Ingo,
Volanomark slows by 80% with CFS scheduler on 2.6.23-rc1.
Benchmark was run on a 2 socket Core2 machine.
The change in scheduler treatment of sched_yield
could play a part in changing Volanomark behavior.
In CFS, sched_yield is implemented
by dequeueing and requeueing a process . The time a process
has spent running probably reduced the the cpu time due it
by only a bit. The process could get re-queued pretty close
to head of the queue, and may get scheduled again pretty
quickly if there is still a lot of cpu time due.
It may make sense to queue the
yielding process a bit further behind in the queue.
I made a slight change by zeroing out wait_runtime
(i.e. have the process gives
up cpu time due for it to run) for experimentation.
Let's put aside gripes that Volanomark should have used a
better mechanism to coordinate threads instead sched_yield for
a second. Volanomark runs better
and is only 40% (instead of 80%) down from old scheduler
without CFS.
Of course we should not tune for Volanomark and this is
reference data.
What are your view on how CFS's sched_yield should behave?
Regards,
Tim
[-- Attachment #2: patch.sched_yield --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 336 bytes --]
--- linux-2.6.23-rc1/kernel/sched_fair.c.orig 2007-07-27 09:39:11.000000000 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc1/kernel/sched_fair.c 2007-07-27 09:40:41.000000000 -0700
@@ -841,6 +841,7 @@
* position within the tree:
*/
dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, &p->se, 0, now);
+ p->se.wait_runtime = 0;
enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, &p->se, 0, now);
}
next reply other threads:[~2007-07-27 23:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-27 22:01 Tim Chen [this message]
2007-07-28 0:31 ` Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS Chris Snook
2007-07-28 0:59 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28 3:43 ` pluggable scheduler flamewar thread (was Re: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS) Chris Snook
2007-07-28 5:01 ` pluggable scheduler " Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28 6:51 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-30 18:49 ` Tim Chen
2007-07-30 21:07 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-30 21:24 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28 13:28 ` Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS Dmitry Adamushko
2007-07-28 2:47 ` Rik van Riel
2007-07-28 20:26 ` Dave Jones
2007-07-28 12:36 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-07-28 18:55 ` David Schwartz
2007-07-29 17:37 ` [patch] sched: yield debugging Ingo Molnar
2007-07-30 18:10 ` Tim Chen
2007-07-31 20:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-01 20:53 ` Tim Chen
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=1185573687.19777.44.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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