public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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);
 }
 

             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