From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE/RFC] Really Fair Scheduler
Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2007 17:29:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070902152900.GA23642@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0709021655340.1817@scrub.home>
* Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > And if you look at the resulting code size/complexity, it actually
> > increases with Roman's patch (UP, nodebug, x86):
> >
> > text data bss dec hex filename
> > 13420 228 1204 14852 3a04 sched.o.rc5
> > 13554 228 1228 15010 3aa2 sched.o.rc5-roman
>
> That's pretty easy to explain due to differences in inlining:
>
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 15092 228 1204 16524 408c kernel/sched.o
> 15444 224 1228 16896 4200 kernel/sched.o.rfs
> 14708 224 1228 16160 3f20 kernel/sched.o.rfs.noinline
no, when generating those numbers i used:
CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE=y
# CONFIG_FORCED_INLINING is not set
(but i also re-did it for all the other combinations of these build
flags and similar results can be seen - your patch, despite removing
lots of source code, produces a larger sched.o.)
> Sorry, but I didn't spend as much time as you on tuning these numbers.
some changes did slip into your patch that have no other purpose but to
reduce code size:
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
unsigned long cpu_load[CPU_LOAD_IDX_MAX];
+#endif
[...]
+#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
/* Used instead of source_load when we know the type == 0 */
unsigned long weighted_cpuload(const int cpu)
{
return cpu_rq(cpu)->ls.load.weight;
}
+#endif
[...]
so i thought you must be aware of the problem - at least considering how
much you've criticised CFS's "complexity" both in your initial review of
CFS (which included object size comparisons) and in this patch
submission of yours (which did not include object size comparisons
though).
> > so unmodified CFS is 4.6% faster on this box than with Roman's patch
> > and it's also more consistent/stable (10 times lower fluctuations).
>
> Was SCHED_DEBUG enabled or disabled for these runs?
debugging disabled of course. (your patch has a self-validity checking
function [verify_queue()] that is called on SCHED_DEBUG=y, it would have
been unfair to test your patch with that included.)
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-02 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-31 2:05 [ANNOUNCE/RFC] Really Fair Scheduler Roman Zippel
2007-08-31 9:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-08-31 13:22 ` Roman Zippel
2007-08-31 13:55 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-09-01 4:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-08-31 10:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-08-31 13:19 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 9:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-03 2:58 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-06 3:03 ` Syren Baran
2007-09-01 6:48 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 2:19 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-09-02 17:02 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 0:52 ` Daniel Walker
2007-09-02 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-02 8:40 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-09-02 9:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-02 15:16 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 15:29 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-09-02 17:16 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 19:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-09-07 15:35 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-08 7:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-09-08 8:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-09-10 23:23 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-11 6:18 ` Mike Galbraith
2007-09-11 11:28 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 14:47 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-02 15:00 ` Daniel Walker
2007-09-03 18:20 ` Roman Zippel
2007-09-03 21:06 ` Daniel Walker
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=20070902152900.GA23642@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=zippel@linux-m68k.org \
/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