From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de,
pjt@google.com, preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de, riel@redhat.com,
aswin@hp.com, scott.norton@hp.com, srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH v4 3/3] sched: Periodically decay max cost of idle balance
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2013 23:02:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1378274579.3004.9.camel@j-VirtualBox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130830102941.GF10002@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 12:29 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> rcu_read_lock();
> for_each_domain(cpu, sd) {
> + /*
> + * Decay the newidle max times here because this is a regular
> + * visit to all the domains. Decay ~0.5% per second.
> + */
> + if (time_after(jiffies, sd->next_decay_max_lb_cost)) {
> + sd->max_newidle_lb_cost =
> + (sd->max_newidle_lb_cost * 254) / 256;
I initially picked 0.5%, but after trying it out, it appears to decay very
slowing when the max is at a high value. Should we increase the decay a
little bit more? Maybe something like:
sd->max_newidle_lb_cost = (sd->max_newidle_lb_cost * 63) / 64;
> + /*
> + * Stop the load balance at this level. There is another
> + * CPU in our sched group which is doing load balancing more
> + * actively.
> + */
> + if (!continue_balancing) {
Is "continue_balancing" named "balance" in older kernels?
Here are the AIM7 results with the other 2 patches + this patch with the
slightly higher decay value.
----------------------------------------------------------------
workload | % improvement | % improvement | % improvement
| with patch | with patch | with patch
| 1100-2000 users | 200-1000 users | 10-100 users
----------------------------------------------------------------
alltests | +9.2% | +5.2% | +0.3%
----------------------------------------------------------------
compute | +0.0% | -0.9% | +0.6%
----------------------------------------------------------------
custom | +18.6% | +15.3% | +7.0%
----------------------------------------------------------------
disk | +4.0% | +16.5% | +7.1%
----------------------------------------------------------------
fserver | +64.8% | +27.5% | -0.6%
----------------------------------------------------------------
high_systime | +15.1% | +7.9% | +0.0%
----------------------------------------------------------------
new_fserver | +51.0% | +20.1% | -1.3%
----------------------------------------------------------------
shared | +6.3% | +8.8% | +2.8%
----------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-04 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-29 20:05 [PATCH v4 0/3] sched: Limiting idle balance Jason Low
2013-08-29 20:05 ` [PATCH v4 1/3] sched: Reduce overestimating rq->avg_idle Jason Low
2013-09-02 6:36 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2013-08-29 20:05 ` [PATCH v4 2/3] sched: Consider max cost of idle balance per sched domain Jason Low
2013-08-30 9:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-02 6:54 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2013-09-03 21:06 ` Jason Low
2013-08-29 20:05 ` [RFC][PATCH v4 3/3] sched: Periodically decay max cost of idle balance Jason Low
2013-08-30 10:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-08-30 10:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-04 6:02 ` Jason Low [this message]
2013-09-09 11:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-09 20:40 ` Jason Low
2013-09-04 7:10 ` Jason Low
2013-09-09 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-09-09 21:07 ` Jason Low
2013-09-10 1:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-09-12 10:31 ` [PATCH v4 0/3] sched: Limiting " 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=1378274579.3004.9.camel@j-VirtualBox \
--to=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=preeti@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.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