public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] sched: steer waking task to empty cfs_rq for better latencies
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 22:56:03 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120424172603.GB28701@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335287354.28150.209.camel@twins>

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> [2012-04-24 19:09:14]:

> On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 18:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 22:26 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> > > Steer a waking task towards a cpu where its cgroup has zero tasks (in
> > > order to provide it better sleeper credits and hence reduce its wakeup
> > > latency). 
> > 
> > That's just vile.. pjt could you post your global vruntime stuff so
> > vatsa can have a go at that?
> 
> That is, you're playing a deficiency we should fix, not exploit.
> 
> Also, you do a second loop over all those cpus right after we've already
> iterated them..

The first loop doesn't necessarily iterate thr' all cpus (as its looking
for a core that is fully idle - and hence breaks once it finds a busy
sibling).

> furthermore, that 100%+ gain is still way insane, what else is broken?

?

I have tried most benchmarks that were recommended for this kind of
change. Let me know if you suggest any other benchmark ..

> Did you try those paravirt tlb-flush patches and other such weirdness?

I will try that next. But IMHO the benefit of reduced wakeup latencies
should be over and above any benefit we get from paravirtualization.

- vatsa


  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-24 17:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-24 16:56 [PATCH v1] sched: steer waking task to empty cfs_rq for better latencies Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-04-24 16:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-24 17:07   ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-04-24 17:12     ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-24 17:35       ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-04-24 18:03         ` Rakib Mullick
2012-04-24 17:09   ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-04-24 17:26     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri [this message]
2012-05-02 14:01     ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2012-05-03  5:43       ` Nikunj A Dadhania

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=20120424172603.GB28701@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pjt@google.com \
    --cc=suresh.b.siddha@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