Messages in this thread | | | From | "Doug Smythies" <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH] sched: Folding nohz load accounting more accurate | Date | Mon, 18 Jun 2012 23:19:56 -0700 |
| |
> On 2012.06.18 09:04 -0700, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[... lots deleted ...]
> Can someone please think through the below thing? its been compile > tested only...
[... code patch deleted ...]
Your code patch makes sense to me, but I admit that I still have difficulties to follow this area of code.
Note: I didn't have time yet to review or try Charles' solution.
I back edited this new solution into my working kernel and retested the same two operating points as over the weekend. Summary:
2 Processes @ 90 hertz per process and 0.15 load per process, or 0.30 total. Reported Load Average (long average):
Kernel 3.5 RC2: ~1.5 Kernel Peter 2012.06.15: ~1.8 Kernel Peter 2012.06.18: ~0.3 (0.28)
8 processes @ 150 hertz per process and 0.7925 load per process, or 6.34 total. Reported Load Average (long average):
Kernel 3.5 RC2: ~3.9 Kernel Peter 2012.06.15: ~7.9 Kernel Peter 2012.06.18: ~6.3
I will start one of my longer term experiments tonight. It will take many days to do all the tests. If things change, the tests can be re-started.
Note: On my computers I have no way to test the catch- up code path, as my computers never take that path.
A note on the test code for loading (from other branch of this thread): Peter, I'll try your code sometime. It was on purpose that I made mine a mindless code loop, without any system calls to keep time. But yes, mine is proving a little annoying to use.
| |