From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755360AbaHEPnE (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:43:04 -0400 Received: from g4t3427.houston.hp.com ([15.201.208.55]:40436 "EHLO g4t3427.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753894AbaHEPnD (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2014 11:43:03 -0400 Message-ID: <1407253377.2487.11.camel@j-VirtualBox> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load From: Jason Low To: Yuyang Du Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Segall , Waiman Long , Mel Gorman , Mike Galbraith , Rik van Riel , Aswin Chandramouleeswaran , Chegu Vinod , Scott J Norton Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:42:57 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20140804191526.GA2480@intel.com> References: <1407184118.11407.11.camel@j-VirtualBox> <20140804191526.GA2480@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2014-08-05 at 03:15 +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > Hi Jason, > > I am not sure whether you noticed my latest work: rewriting per entity load average > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1760754 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1760755 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1760757 > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1760756 > > which simply does not track blocked load average at all. Are you interested in > testing the patchset with the workload you have? Hi Yuyang, yes I can also test your latest patchset with some of the AIM7 workloads. Not needing extra overhead for the blocked load should also address this contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load(). > The comparison can also help > us understand the rewrite. Overall, per our tests, the overhead should be less, > and perf should be better.