public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Ting Yang <tingy@cs.umass.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] CFS scheduler, -v7
Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 17:17:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070503151741.GC1812@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4639F970.5080701@cs.umass.edu>


* Ting Yang <tingy@cs.umass.edu> wrote:

> +    s64 __delta = curr->fair_key - p->fair_key;
> +
> +    /*
> +     * Take scheduling granularity into account - do not
> +     * preempt the current task unless the best task has
> +     * a larger than sched_granularity fairness advantage:
> +     */
> +    if (__delta > niced_granularity(rq, curr, granularity))
> +        resched_task(curr);
> +}
> 
> This code actually now says, the difference of fair_key needed to 
> preempt the current task is amplified by a facto of its weigh (in Al 
> Boldi's example 32). However, the weighted task already advance its 
> p->fair_key by its weight, (also 32 here). The combination of them 
> becomes quadratic!

it's not quadratic in terms of CPU share: the first factor impacts the 
CPU share, the second factor impacts the granularity. This means that 
reniced workloads will be preempted in a more finegrained way - but 
otherwise there's _no_ quadratic effect for CPU time - which is a 
completely separate metric. Remember: there are no timeslices in CFS, so 
a task can be preempted any number of times without being at a 
disadvantage.

>     Besides this quadratic effect, another minor issue amplified this 
> a little bit further: p->wait_runtime accumulated before. [...]

actually, this 'minor issue' was the main issue that caused the bug ;-)

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2007-05-03 15:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-04-30  5:20 [patch] CFS scheduler, -v7 Al Boldi
2007-05-03  7:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03  8:07   ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03 11:16     ` Al Boldi
2007-05-03 12:36       ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03 13:49         ` Al Boldi
2007-05-03  8:42   ` Al Boldi
2007-05-03 15:02   ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 15:17     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-05-03 16:00       ` Ting Yang
2007-05-03 19:48         ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-03 19:57           ` William Lee Irwin III
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-04-28 15:25 Ingo Molnar
2007-04-28 19:20 ` S.Çağlar Onur
2007-04-28 19:24   ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-28 23:42     ` S.Çağlar Onur
2007-04-29  7:11       ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-29 12:37         ` S.Çağlar Onur
2007-04-29 15:58           ` Ingo Molnar
2007-04-29 22:29             ` Dennis Brendel
2007-04-30 14:38             ` S.Çağlar Onur
2007-04-28 19:27   ` S.Çağlar Onur
2007-04-29 17:28 ` Prakash Punnoor
2007-05-04 13:05   ` Prakash Punnoor
2007-04-30 16:29 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2007-04-30 18:30 ` Balbir Singh

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=20070503151741.GC1812@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tingy@cs.umass.edu \
    /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