[lkml]   [2011]   [Sep]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vs unpinnede
    On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 09:45 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
    > * Peter Zijlstra <> [2011-09-12 14:35:43]:
    > > Of course it does.. and I bet you can improve that slightly if you
    > > manage to fix some of the numerical nightmares that live in the cgroup
    > > load-balancer (Paul, care to share your WIP?)
    > Booting with "nohz=off" also helps significantly.
    > With nohz=on, average idle time (over 1 min) is 10.3%
    > With nohz=off, average idle time (over 1 min) is 3.9%

    So we should put the cpufreq/idle governor into the nohz/idle path, it
    already tries to predict the idle duration in order to pick a C state,
    that same prediction should be used to determine if stopping the tick is
    worth it.

    This has come up previously, but I can't quite recollect in what

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-09-13 16:23    [W:0.019 / U:2.212 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site