From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Dmitry Ilvokhin <d@ilvokhin.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] sched/stats: Optimize /proc/schedstat printing
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 15:07:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251029140755.GF4067720@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aQIRg9EaBSX2rrGx@shell.ilvokhin.com>
On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 01:07:15PM +0000, Dmitry Ilvokhin wrote:
> Function seq_printf supports rich format string for decimals printing,
> but there is no need for it in /proc/schedstat, since majority of the
> data is space separared decimals. Use seq_put_decimal_ull instead as
> faster alternative.
>
> Performance counter stats (truncated) for sh -c 'cat /proc/schedstat >
> /dev/null' before and after applying the patch from machine with 72 CPUs
> are below.
>
> Before:
>
> 2.94 msec task-clock # 0.820 CPUs utilized
> 1 context-switches # 340.551 /sec
> 0 cpu-migrations # 0.000 /sec
> 340 page-faults # 115.787 K/sec
> 10,327,200 instructions # 1.89 insn per cycle
> # 0.10 stalled cycles per insn
> 5,458,307 cycles # 1.859 GHz
> 1,052,733 stalled-cycles-frontend # 19.29% frontend cycles idle
> 2,066,321 branches # 703.687 M/sec
> 25,621 branch-misses # 1.24% of all branches
>
> 0.00357974 +- 0.00000209 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.06% )
>
> After:
>
> 2.50 msec task-clock # 0.785 CPUs utilized
> 1 context-switches # 399.780 /sec
> 0 cpu-migrations # 0.000 /sec
> 340 page-faults # 135.925 K/sec
> 7,371,867 instructions # 1.59 insn per cycle
> # 0.13 stalled cycles per insn
> 4,647,053 cycles # 1.858 GHz
> 986,487 stalled-cycles-frontend # 21.23% frontend cycles idle
> 1,591,374 branches # 636.199 M/sec
> 28,973 branch-misses # 1.82% of all branches
>
> 0.00318461 +- 0.00000295 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.09% )
>
> This is ~11% (relative) improvement in time elapsed.
Yeah, but who cares? Why do we want less obvious code for a silly stats
file?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-29 14:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-29 13:07 [PATCH RESEND] sched/stats: Optimize /proc/schedstat printing Dmitry Ilvokhin
2025-10-29 14:07 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2025-10-29 14:46 ` Dmitry Ilvokhin
2025-10-29 14:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-10-29 15:49 ` Dmitry Ilvokhin
2025-11-05 15:04 ` Dmitry Ilvokhin
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=20251029140755.GF4067720@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=d@ilvokhin.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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