From: Karl Rister <kmr@us.ibm.com>
To: pjt@google.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Pierre Bourdon <pbourdon@excellency.fr>,
Paul Turner <p@us.ibm.com>,
habanero@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 00/12] [RFC tg_shares_up - v1 00/12] Reducing cost of tg->shares distribution
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 13:27:18 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD1A986.2000508@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101016044349.830426011@google.com>
Hi All
Here is a some performance data for the previously posted patches
running a LAMP workload in a cloud-like environment which show promising
reductions in CPU utilization. In this particular test, 32 groups
equaling 64 KVM guests (each group consists of an Apache server guest
and a MySQL server guest) are running a LAMP workload being driven by
external load drivers. When using the default values in /etc/cgconfig.conf:
mount {
cpuset = /cgroup/cpuset;
cpu = /cgroup/cpu;
cpuacct = /cgroup/cpuacct;
memory = /cgroup/memory;
devices = /cgroup/devices;
freezer = /cgroup/freezer;
net_cls = /cgroup/net_cls;
blkio = /cgroup/blkio;
}
which enable libvirt usage of cgroups the contents of /proc/cgroups
looks like this before launching the guests:
#subsys_name hierarchy num_cgroups enabled
cpuset 1 4 1
ns 0 1 1
cpu 2 4 1
cpuacct 3 4 1
memory 4 4 1
devices 5 4 1
freezer 6 4 1
net_cls 7 1 1
blkio 8 1 1
and like this after launching the guests:
#subsys_name hierarchy num_cgroups enabled
cpuset 1 68 1
ns 0 1 1
cpu 2 68 1
cpuacct 3 68 1
memory 4 68 1
devices 5 68 1
freezer 6 68 1
net_cls 7 1 1
blkio 8 1 1
When running the workload the run with the patches used significantly
less CPU:
Host CPU utilization with patches: 54.35%
Host CPU utilization without patches: 80.89%
Since the workload uses a fixed injection rate the achieved throughput
for both test runs was the same, however the run with the patches
applied did achieve better quality of service metrics.
NOTE: The runs were made using kvm.git changeset
cec8b6b972a572b69d4902f57fb659e8a4c749af.
--
Karl Rister <kmr@us.ibm.com>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-03 18:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-10-16 4:43 [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 00/12] [RFC tg_shares_up - v1 00/12] Reducing cost of tg->shares distribution pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 01/12] sched: rewrite tg_shares_up pjt
2010-10-21 6:04 ` Bharata B Rao
2010-10-21 6:28 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-21 8:08 ` Bharata B Rao
2010-10-21 8:38 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-21 9:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <AANLkTi=zYAfb_izD15ROxH=C6+zPzX+XEGw7r5UUoAar@mail.gmail.com>
2010-11-04 21:00 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 02/12] sched: on-demand (active) cfs_rq list pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 03/12] sched: make tg_shares_up() walk on-demand pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 04/12] sched: fix load corruption from update_cfs_shares pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 05/12] sched: fix update_cfs_load synchronization pjt
2010-10-21 9:52 ` Bharata B Rao
2010-10-21 18:25 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 06/12] sched: hierarchal order on shares update list pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 07/12] sched: add sysctl_sched_shares_window pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 08/12] sched: update shares on idle_balance pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 09/12] sched: demand based update_cfs_load() pjt
2010-10-16 4:43 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 10/12] sched: allow update_cfs_load to update global load pjt
2010-10-16 4:44 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 11/12] sched: update tg->shares after cpu.shares write pjt
2010-10-16 4:44 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 12/12] debug: export effective shares for analysis versus specified pjt
2010-10-16 19:46 ` [RFC tg_shares_up improvements - v1 00/12] [RFC tg_shares_up - v1 00/12] Reducing cost of tg->shares distribution Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-21 6:36 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-22 0:14 ` Paul Turner
2010-10-17 5:24 ` Balbir Singh
2010-10-17 9:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-17 12:09 ` Balbir Singh
2010-11-03 18:27 ` Karl Rister [this message]
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=4CD1A986.2000508@us.ibm.com \
--to=kmr@us.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=habanero@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=p@us.ibm.com \
--cc=pbourdon@excellency.fr \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.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