From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267518AbUHEAAX (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 20:00:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S267522AbUHEAAX (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 20:00:23 -0400 Received: from e2.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.102]:16516 "EHLO e2.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S267518AbUHEAAU (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Aug 2004 20:00:20 -0400 Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 16:59:39 -0700 From: "Martin J. Bligh" To: Peter Williams , Andrew Morton , Rick Lindsley cc: kernel@kolivas.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 performance improvements (scheduler?) Message-ID: <239380000.1091663979@flay> In-Reply-To: <411174C6.2020109@bigpond.net.au> References: <6560000.1091632215@[10.10.2.4]> <7480000.1091632378@[10.10.2.4]> <20040804122414.4f8649df.akpm@osdl.org> <411174C6.2020109@bigpond.net.au> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.2 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --On Thursday, August 05, 2004 09:44:06 +1000 Peter Williams wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: >> "Martin J. Bligh" wrote: >> >>> SDET 8 (see disclaimer) >>> Throughput Std. Dev >>> 2.6.7 100.0% 0.2% >>> 2.6.8-rc2 100.2% 1.0% >>> 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 117.4% 0.9% >>> >>> SDET 16 (see disclaimer) >>> Throughput Std. Dev >>> 2.6.7 100.0% 0.3% >>> 2.6.8-rc2 99.5% 0.3% >>> 2.6.8-rc2-mm2 118.5% 0.6% >> >> >> hum, interesting. Can Con's changes affect the inter-node and inter-cpu >> balancing decisions, or is this all due to caching effects, reduced context >> switching etc? > > One candidate for the cause of this improvement is the replacement of the active/expired array mechanism with a single array. I believe that one of the short comings of the active/expired array mechanism is that it can lead to excessive queuing (possibly even starvation) of tasks that aren't considered "interactive". Rick showed me schedstats graphs of the two ... it seems to have lower latency, does less rebalancing, fewer pull_tasks, etc, etc. Everything looks better ... he'll send them out soon, I think (hint, hint). M.