From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
Barry Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Scale wakeup granularity relative to nr_running
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 16:02:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210927150240.GI3959@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKfTPtDETjTEno8XURNVqzkqOONuAYRnhvNXmHzC7Hc_crwA_Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 04:19:00PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Sept 2021 at 13:17, Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 02:41:06PM +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > On Thu, 23 Sept 2021 at 11:22, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2021-09-23 at 10:40 +0200, Vincent Guittot wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > a 100us value should even be enough to fix Mel's problem without
> > > > > impacting common wakeup preemption cases.
> > > >
> > > > It'd be nice if it turn out to be something that simple, but color me
> > > > skeptical. I've tried various preemption throttling schemes, and while
> > >
> > > Let's see what the results will show. I tend to agree that this will
> > > not be enough to cover all use cases and I don't see any other way to
> > > cover all cases than getting some inputs from the threads about their
> > > latency fairness which bring us back to some kind of latency niceness
> > > value
> > >
> >
> > Unfortunately, I didn't get a complete set of results but enough to work
> > with. The missing tests have been requeued. The figures below are based
> > on a single-socket Skylake machine with 8 CPUs as it had the most set of
> > results and is the basic case.
> >
> > The reported kernels are
> >
> > vanilla: vanilla 5.15-rc1
> > sched-scalewakegran-v2r4: My patch
> > sched-moveforward-v1r1: Vincent's patch
>
> I imagine that this is the results for the 1st version which scales
> with the number of CPUs
>
Yes, the v1r5 results were incomplete and had to be requeued.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-27 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-20 14:26 [PATCH 0/2] Scale wakeup granularity relative to nr_running Mel Gorman
2021-09-20 14:26 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Remove redundant lookup of rq in check_preempt_wakeup Mel Gorman
2021-09-21 7:21 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-21 7:53 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-21 8:12 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-21 8:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-21 10:03 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-20 14:26 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Scale wakeup granularity relative to nr_running Mel Gorman
2021-09-21 3:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-21 5:50 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-21 7:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-21 10:36 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-21 12:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-21 14:03 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-05 9:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-22 5:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-22 13:20 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-22 14:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-22 14:15 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-22 15:04 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-22 16:00 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-22 17:38 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-22 18:22 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-22 18:57 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-23 1:47 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-23 8:40 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-23 9:21 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-23 12:41 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-23 13:14 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-27 11:17 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-27 14:17 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-04 8:05 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-04 16:37 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-10-05 7:41 ` Mel Gorman
2021-09-27 14:19 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-27 15:02 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2021-09-23 12:24 ` Phil Auld
2021-10-05 10:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 14:12 ` Phil Auld
2021-10-05 14:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 10:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-05 9:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-09-22 15:05 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-10-05 9:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-10-03 3:07 ` wakeup_affine_weight() is b0rked - was " Mike Galbraith
2021-10-03 7:34 ` Barry Song
2021-10-03 14:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-03 21:06 ` Barry Song
2021-10-04 1:49 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-04 4:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-04 9:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-05 7:47 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-05 8:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-05 9:31 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-06 6:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-08 5:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-09-21 8:03 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-09-21 10:45 ` Mel Gorman
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=20210927150240.GI3959@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).