From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Bharata B Rao <bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 00/16] CFS Bandwidth Control v7
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2011 12:35:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110626103526.GA11093@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E041C6A.4000701@jp.fujitsu.com>
* Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com> wrote:
> - 865.139070 task-clock # 0.468 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.22% )
> - 200,167 context-switches # 0.231 M/sec ( +- 0.00% )
> - 0 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec ( +- 49.62% )
> - 142 page-faults # 0.000 M/sec ( +- 0.07% )
> - 1,671,107,623 cycles # 1.932 GHz ( +- 0.16% ) [28.23%]
> - 838,554,329 stalled-cycles-frontend # 50.18% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.27% ) [28.21%]
> - 453,526,560 stalled-cycles-backend # 27.14% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.43% ) [28.33%]
> - 1,434,140,915 instructions # 0.86 insns per cycle
> - # 0.58 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.06% ) [34.01%]
> - 279,485,621 branches # 323.053 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [33.98%]
> - 6,653,998 branch-misses # 2.38% of all branches ( +- 0.16% ) [33.93%]
> - 495,463,378 L1-dcache-loads # 572.698 M/sec ( +- 0.05% ) [28.12%]
> - 27,903,270 L1-dcache-load-misses # 5.63% of all L1-dcache hits ( +- 0.28% ) [27.84%]
> - 885,210 LLC-loads # 1.023 M/sec ( +- 3.21% ) [21.80%]
> - 9,479 LLC-load-misses # 1.07% of all LL-cache hits ( +- 0.63% ) [ 5.61%]
> - 830,096,007 L1-icache-loads # 959.494 M/sec ( +- 0.08% ) [11.18%]
> - 123,728,370 L1-icache-load-misses # 14.91% of all L1-icache hits ( +- 0.06% ) [16.78%]
> - 504,932,490 dTLB-loads # 583.643 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [22.30%]
> - 2,056,069 dTLB-load-misses # 0.41% of all dTLB cache hits ( +- 2.23% ) [22.20%]
> - 1,579,410,083 iTLB-loads # 1825.614 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [22.30%]
> - 394,739 iTLB-load-misses # 0.02% of all iTLB cache hits ( +- 0.03% ) [22.27%]
> - 2,286,363 L1-dcache-prefetches # 2.643 M/sec ( +- 0.72% ) [22.40%]
> - 776,096 L1-dcache-prefetch-misses # 0.897 M/sec ( +- 1.45% ) [22.54%]
> + 859.259725 task-clock # 0.472 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.24% )
> + 200,165 context-switches # 0.233 M/sec ( +- 0.00% )
> + 0 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec ( +-100.00% )
> + 142 page-faults # 0.000 M/sec ( +- 0.06% )
> + 1,659,371,974 cycles # 1.931 GHz ( +- 0.18% ) [28.23%]
> + 829,806,955 stalled-cycles-frontend # 50.01% frontend cycles idle ( +- 0.32% ) [28.32%]
> + 490,316,435 stalled-cycles-backend # 29.55% backend cycles idle ( +- 0.46% ) [28.34%]
> + 1,445,166,061 instructions # 0.87 insns per cycle
> + # 0.57 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 0.06% ) [34.01%]
> + 282,370,988 branches # 328.621 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [33.93%]
> + 5,056,568 branch-misses # 1.79% of all branches ( +- 0.19% ) [33.94%]
> + 500,660,789 L1-dcache-loads # 582.665 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [28.05%]
> + 26,802,313 L1-dcache-load-misses # 5.35% of all L1-dcache hits ( +- 0.26% ) [27.83%]
> + 872,571 LLC-loads # 1.015 M/sec ( +- 3.73% ) [21.82%]
> + 9,050 LLC-load-misses # 1.04% of all LL-cache hits ( +- 0.55% ) [ 5.70%]
> + 794,396,111 L1-icache-loads # 924.512 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [11.30%]
> + 130,179,414 L1-icache-load-misses # 16.39% of all L1-icache hits ( +- 0.09% ) [16.85%]
> + 511,119,889 dTLB-loads # 594.837 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [22.37%]
> + 2,452,378 dTLB-load-misses # 0.48% of all dTLB cache hits ( +- 2.31% ) [22.14%]
> + 1,597,897,243 iTLB-loads # 1859.621 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [22.17%]
> + 394,366 iTLB-load-misses # 0.02% of all iTLB cache hits ( +- 0.03% ) [22.24%]
> + 1,897,401 L1-dcache-prefetches # 2.208 M/sec ( +- 0.64% ) [22.38%]
> + 879,391 L1-dcache-prefetch-misses # 1.023 M/sec ( +- 0.90% ) [22.54%]
>
> - 1.847093132 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.19% )
> + 1.822131534 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.21% )
> =====
>
> As Peter have expected, the number of branches is slightly increased.
>
> - 279,485,621 branches # 323.053 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [33.98%]
> + 282,370,988 branches # 328.621 M/sec ( +- 0.06% ) [33.93%]
>
> However, looking overall, I think there is no significant problem on
> the score with this patch set. I'd love to hear from maintainers.
Yeah, these numbers look pretty good. Note that the percentages in
the third column (the amount of time that particular event was
measured) is pretty low, and it would be nice to eliminate it: i.e.
now that we know the ballpark figures do very precise measurements
that do not over-commit the PMU.
One such measurement would be:
-e cycles -e instructions -e branches
This should also bring the stddev percentages down i think, to below
0.1%.
Another measurement would be to test not just the feature-enabled but
also the feature-disabled cost - so that we document the rough
overhead that users of this new scheduler feature should expect.
Organizing it into neat before/after numbers and percentages,
comparing it with noise (stddev) [i.e. determining that the effect we
measure is above noise] and putting it all into the changelog would
be the other goal of these measurements.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-26 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-21 7:16 [patch 00/16] CFS Bandwidth Control v7 Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 01/16] sched: (fixlet) dont update shares twice on on_rq parent Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 02/16] sched: hierarchical task accounting for SCHED_OTHER Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 03/16] sched: introduce primitives to account for CFS bandwidth tracking Paul Turner
2011-06-22 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-07-06 21:38 ` Paul Turner
2011-07-07 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 04/16] sched: validate CFS quota hierarchies Paul Turner
2011-06-22 5:43 ` Bharata B Rao
2011-06-22 6:57 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-22 9:38 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 05/16] sched: accumulate per-cfs_rq cpu usage and charge against bandwidth Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 06/16] sched: add a timer to handle CFS bandwidth refresh Paul Turner
2011-06-22 9:38 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 07/16] sched: expire invalid runtime Paul Turner
2011-06-22 9:38 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-22 15:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 4:42 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-29 2:29 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 08/16] sched: throttle cfs_rq entities which exceed their local runtime Paul Turner
2011-06-22 7:11 ` Bharata B Rao
2011-06-22 16:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-22 16:54 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 09/16] sched: unthrottle cfs_rq(s) who ran out of quota at period refresh Paul Turner
2011-06-22 17:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 4:40 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-28 9:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-29 3:37 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:16 ` [patch 10/16] sched: throttle entities exceeding their allowed bandwidth Paul Turner
2011-06-22 9:39 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 11/16] sched: allow for positional tg_tree walks Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 12/16] sched: prevent interactions with throttled entities Paul Turner
2011-06-22 21:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 4:43 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-23 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 4:38 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 13/16] sched: migrate throttled tasks on HOTPLUG Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 14/16] sched: add exports tracking cfs bandwidth control statistics Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 15/16] sched: return unused runtime on voluntary sleep Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:33 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-22 9:39 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-23 15:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 1:42 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-28 10:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-28 18:45 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-21 7:17 ` [patch 16/16] sched: add documentation for bandwidth control Paul Turner
2011-06-21 10:30 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-21 19:46 ` Paul Turner
2011-06-22 10:05 ` [patch 00/16] CFS Bandwidth Control v7 Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-23 12:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-06-23 12:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-24 5:11 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2011-06-26 10:35 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2011-06-29 4:05 ` Hu Tao
2011-07-01 12:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-07-05 3:58 ` Hu Tao
2011-07-05 8:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-07-05 8:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-07-07 3:53 ` Hu Tao
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=20110626103526.GA11093@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhaval.giani@gmail.com \
--cc=kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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