From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Michael Gerdau <mgd@technosis.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Gene Heskett <gene.heskett@gmail.com>,
Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.jussieu.fr>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Peter Williams <pwil3058@bigpond.net.au>,
ck list <ck@vds.kolivas.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [REPORT] cfs-v5 vs sd-0.46
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:23:06 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070424082305.GA6332@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200704241017.10610.mgd@technosis.de>
* Michael Gerdau <mgd@technosis.de> wrote:
> > so to be totally 'fair' and get the same rescheduling 'granularity'
> > you should probably lower CFS's sched_granularity_ns to 2 msecs.
>
> I'll change default nice in cfs to -10.
>
> I'm also happy to adjust /proc/sys/kernel/sched_granularity_ns to
> 2msec. However checking /proc/sys/kernel/rr_interval reveals it is 16
> (msec) on my system.
ah, yeah - there due to the SMP rule in SD:
rr_interval *= 1 + ilog2(num_online_cpus());
and you have a 2-CPU system, so you get 8msec*2 == 16 msecs default
interval. I find this a neat solution and i have talked to Con about
this already and i'll adopt Con's idea in CFS too. Nevertheless, despite
the settings, SD seems to be rescheduling every 6-7 msecs, while CFS
reschedules only every 13 msecs.
Here i'm assuming that the vmstats are directly comparable: that your
number-crunchers behave the same during the full runtime - is that
correct? (If not then the vmstat result should be run at roughly the
same type of "stage" of the workload, on all the schedulers.)
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-24 8:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-04-24 7:37 [REPORT] cfs-v5 vs sd-0.46 Michael Gerdau
2007-04-24 7:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-24 8:16 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-04-24 8:23 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-04-24 8:41 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-04-24 8:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-24 9:06 ` Michael Gerdau
2007-04-26 1:06 ` [ck] " Con Kolivas
2007-04-26 6:10 ` Michael Gerdau
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=20070424082305.GA6332@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=ck@vds.kolivas.org \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=gene.heskett@gmail.com \
--cc=jch@pps.jussieu.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgd@technosis.de \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=pwil3058@bigpond.net.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=wli@holomorphy.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