public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:26:00 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070728202600.GA7487@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46AAAE39.4070905@redhat.com>

On Fri, Jul 27, 2007 at 10:47:21PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
 > Tim Chen wrote:
 > > Ingo,
 > > 
 > > Volanomark slows by 80% with CFS scheduler on 2.6.23-rc1.  
 > > Benchmark was run on a 2 socket Core2 machine.
 > > 
 > > The change in scheduler treatment of sched_yield 
 > > could play a part in changing Volanomark behavior.
 > > In CFS, sched_yield is implemented
 > > by dequeueing and requeueing a process .  The time a process 
 > > has spent running probably reduced the the cpu time due it 
 > > by only a bit. The process could get re-queued pretty close
 > > to head of the queue, and may get scheduled again pretty
 > > quickly if there is still a lot of cpu time due.  
 > 
 > I wonder if this explains the 30% drop in top performance
 > seen with the MySQL sysbench benchmark when the scheduler
 > changed to CFS...
 > 
 > See http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/sysbench.png

 From the authors blog when he did that graph:
 http://jeffr-tech.livejournal.com/10103.html

"So I updated the image for the second time today to include Ingo's cfs
 scheduler. This kernel is from the rpm on his website. I double checked
 that it was not using tcmalloc at the time and switching back to a
 2.6.21 kernel returned to the expected perf.

 Basically, it has the same performance as the FreeBSD 4BSD scheduler
 now. Which is to say the peak is terrible but it has virtually no
 dropoff and performs better under load than the default 2.6.21
 scheduler. "



	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk

  reply	other threads:[~2007-07-28 20:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-07-27 22:01 Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS Tim Chen
2007-07-28  0:31 ` Chris Snook
2007-07-28  0:59   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28  3:43     ` pluggable scheduler flamewar thread (was Re: Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS) Chris Snook
2007-07-28  5:01       ` pluggable scheduler " Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28  6:51         ` Chris Snook
2007-07-30 18:49           ` Tim Chen
2007-07-30 21:07             ` Chris Snook
2007-07-30 21:24               ` Andrea Arcangeli
2007-07-28 13:28   ` Volanomark slows by 80% under CFS Dmitry Adamushko
2007-07-28  2:47 ` Rik van Riel
2007-07-28 20:26   ` Dave Jones [this message]
2007-07-28 12:36 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2007-07-28 18:55   ` David Schwartz
2007-07-29 17:37 ` [patch] sched: yield debugging Ingo Molnar
2007-07-30 18:10   ` Tim Chen
2007-07-31 20:33     ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-01 20:53       ` Tim Chen

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=20070728202600.GA7487@redhat.com \
    --to=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.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