From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 20:24:45 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090106145445.GF4574@dirshya.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1231130416.5479.8.camel@marge.simson.net>
* Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> [2009-01-05 05:40:16]:
> On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 08:50 +0530, Vaidyanathan Srinivasan wrote:
> > When CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG is enabled, the sched domain tree is dumped
> > (dmesg)
>
> Oh, that. I'm dense <thwack>
>
> [ 0.476050] CPU0 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.476052] domain 0: span 0-1 level MC
> [ 0.476054] groups: 0 1
> [ 0.476057] domain 1: span 0-3 level CPU
> [ 0.476058] groups: 0-1 2-3
> [ 0.476062] CPU1 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.476064] domain 0: span 0-1 level MC
> [ 0.476065] groups: 1 0
> [ 0.476067] domain 1: span 0-3 level CPU
> [ 0.476069] groups: 0-1 2-3
> [ 0.476072] CPU2 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.476073] domain 0: span 2-3 level MC
> [ 0.476075] groups: 2 3
> [ 0.476077] domain 1: span 0-3 level CPU
> [ 0.476078] groups: 2-3 0-1
> [ 0.476081] CPU3 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.476083] domain 0: span 2-3 level MC
> [ 0.476084] groups: 3 2
> [ 0.476086] domain 1: span 0-3 level CPU
> [ 0.476088] groups: 2-3 0-1
Hi Mike,
This seems to be correct for the configuration. Hope this would be
same for shced_mc=1 and sched_mc=2 since you would have hacked
mc_capable.
By default, all 4 cores will be 1 group at CPU at sched_mc={1,2} so
that packages are clearly identified in the CPU level sched groups.
> 2.6.26.8
> [ 0.524043] CPU0 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.524045] domain 0: span 0-1
> [ 0.524046] groups: 0 1
> [ 0.524049] domain 1: span 0-3
> [ 0.524051] groups: 0-1 2-3
> [ 0.524054] CPU1 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.524055] domain 0: span 0-1
> [ 0.524056] groups: 1 0
> [ 0.524059] domain 1: span 0-3
> [ 0.524060] groups: 0-1 2-3
> [ 0.524063] CPU2 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.524064] domain 0: span 2-3
> [ 0.524065] groups: 2 3
> [ 0.524068] domain 1: span 0-3
> [ 0.524069] groups: 2-3 0-1
> [ 0.524072] CPU3 attaching sched-domain:
> [ 0.524073] domain 0: span 2-3
> [ 0.524075] groups: 3 2
> [ 0.524077] domain 1: span 0-3
> [ 0.524078] groups: 2-3 0-1
>
> > I was actually asking about software threads specified in the sysbench
> > benchmark. Your have run almost 256 clients on a 4 core box, does
> > that mean sysbench had 256 worker threads?
>
> Yes.
Let me try similar experiments on my dual socket quad core system.
I was limiting the threads to 8 assuming that the system will max-out
by then.
Thanks for the updates.
--Vaidy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-06 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-18 17:55 [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 1/8] sched: convert BALANCE_FOR_xx_POWER to inline functions Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 2/8] sched: Framework for sched_mc/smt_power_savings=N Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 3/8] sched: favour lower logical cpu number for sched_mc balance Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 4/8] sched: nominate preferred wakeup cpu Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:12 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-19 21:55 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:19 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 22:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 22:38 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-19 22:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-20 4:36 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 4:44 ` Andrew Morton
2008-12-20 7:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-20 10:02 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 10:36 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-20 10:56 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-21 8:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 5/8] sched: bias task wakeups to preferred semi-idle packages Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:11 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 6/8] sched: activate active load balancing in new idle cpus Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 7/8] sched: add SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE at MC and CPU level for sched_mc>0 Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 17:56 ` [PATCH v7 8/8] sched: idle_balance() does not call load_balance_newidle() Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-18 18:12 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-18 20:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 20:19 ` [PATCH v7 0/8] Tunable sched_mc_power_savings=n Ingo Molnar
2008-12-18 20:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-19 8:29 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-19 8:24 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-19 13:34 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-12-29 23:43 ` MinChan Kim
2008-12-30 2:48 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-30 6:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-30 6:44 ` Balbir Singh
2008-12-30 7:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-30 18:07 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-02 7:26 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-02 22:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-03 7:29 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-03 10:16 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-03 11:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-04 15:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-04 18:19 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-04 19:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 3:20 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-05 4:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 6:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-05 15:19 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 9:31 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 15:07 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-06 17:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 18:45 ` Balbir Singh
2009-01-07 8:59 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-07 11:26 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-07 14:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-07 15:35 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-08 8:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-08 17:46 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2009-01-09 6:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-06 14:54 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan [this message]
2008-12-30 17:31 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
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=20090106145445.GF4574@dirshya.in.ibm.com \
--to=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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