From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: [patch] Re: hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 10:14:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1256807691.7158.54.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1256797608.16282.28.camel@ymzhang>
On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 14:26 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 06:46 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > SD_PREFER_LOCAL is still on in rc1 though (double checks;), so you'll go
> > through the power saving code until you reach a domain containing both
> > waker's cpu and wakee's previous cpu even if that code already found
> > that a higher domain wasn't overloaded. Looks to me like that block
> > wants a want_sd && qualifier.
> >
> > Even it you turn SD_PREFER_LOCAL off, you can still hit the overhead if
> > SD_POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE is set, so I'd make sure both are off and see if
> > that's the source (likely, since the rest is already off).
> Yes. SD_POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE is disabled by default. I applied Peter's patch which
> turning SD_PREFER_LOCAL off for MC and cpu domain and it doesn't help.
> perf counter shows select_task_rq_fair still consumes about 5% cpu time. Eventually,
> I found for_each_cpu in for_each_domain consumes the 5% cpu time, because Peter's
> patch doesn't turn off SD_PREFER_LOCAL for node domain.
> I turned it off for node domain against the latest tips tree and tbench regression
> disappears on a Nehalem machine and becomes about 2% on another one.
>
> Can we turn it off for node domain by default?
If it's hurting fast path overhead to the tune of an order of magnitude,
I guess there's no choice but to either fix it or turn it off. Since
SD_BALANCE_WAKE is off globally, I don't see any point in keeping
SD_PREFER_LOCAL at any level.
(That said, what we need is for this to not be so expensive that we
can't afford it in the fast path).
sched: Disable SD_PREFER_LOCAL at node level.
Yanmin Zhang reported that SD_PREFER_LOCAL induces an order of magnitude
increase in select_task_rq_fair() overhead while running heavy wakeup
benchmarks (tbench and vmark). Since SD_BALANCE_WAKE is off at node level,
turn SD_PREFER_LOCAL off as well pending further investigation.
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Reported-by: Zhang, Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
LKML-Reference: <new-submission>
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
index d823c24..40e37b1 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/topology.h
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ extern unsigned long node_remap_size[];
| 1*SD_BALANCE_FORK \
| 0*SD_BALANCE_WAKE \
| 1*SD_WAKE_AFFINE \
- | 1*SD_PREFER_LOCAL \
+ | 0*SD_PREFER_LOCAL \
| 0*SD_SHARE_CPUPOWER \
| 0*SD_POWERSAVINGS_BALANCE \
| 0*SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES \
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-29 9:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 9:19 hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1 Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-09 10:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-12 7:05 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-12 8:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-12 14:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-12 14:33 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-13 3:12 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-13 9:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-13 11:08 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-16 11:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-27 8:03 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-27 14:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-28 9:29 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-28 14:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-29 0:50 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-29 5:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-29 6:26 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-29 9:14 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-10-30 2:02 ` [patch] " Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-14 13:13 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Do less agressive buddy clearing tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=1256807691.7158.54.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.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