From: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"mingo@elte.hu" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>,
"Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: recover sched_yield task running time increase
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 14:15:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1302070509.15889.7351.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D9BF512.6080309@redhat.com>
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 13:07 +0800, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 04/05/2011 06:33 PM, Alex Shi wrote:
> > commit ac53db596cc08ecb8040c removed the sched_yield task running
> > time increase, so the yielded task get more opportunity to be launch
> > again. That may not the caller want to be. And this also causes
> > volano benchmark drop 50~80 percent performance on core2/NHM/WSM
> > machines. This patch recover the sched_yield task vruntime up.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: alex.shi@intel.com
>
> NACK
>
> This was switched off by default and under
> the sysctl sched_compat_yield for a reason.
>
> Reintroducing it under that sysctl option
> may be acceptable, but by default it would
> be doing the wrong thing for other workloads.
I can implement this as sysctl option. But when I checked again the man
page of sched_yield. I have some concerns on this.
----
int sched_yield(void);
DESCRIPTION
A process can relinquish the processor voluntarily without blocking by calling sched_yield().
The process will then be moved to the end of the queue for its static priority and a new process
gets to run.
----
If a application calls sched_yield system call, most of time it is not
want to be launched again right now. so the man page said "the caller
process will then be moved to the _end_ of the queue..."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-06 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-05 22:33 [PATCH] sched: recover sched_yield task running time increase Alex Shi
2011-04-06 5:07 ` Rik van Riel
2011-04-06 6:15 ` Alex,Shi [this message]
2011-04-06 7:01 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-04-06 13:28 ` Shi, Alex
2011-04-07 2:44 ` Mike Galbraith
2011-04-06 8:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-06 14:42 ` Rik van Riel
2011-04-06 15:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-04-07 3:08 ` Alex,Shi
2011-04-07 6:13 ` Rik van Riel
2011-04-07 6:43 ` Alex,Shi
2011-04-07 8:52 ` Ingo Molnar
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=1302070509.15889.7351.camel@debian \
--to=alex.shi@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@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