Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 8 Aug 2014 09:11:03 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load |
| |
On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 06:30:08AM +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > | 10-90 | 100-1000 | 1100-2000 > > > > | users | users | users > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > alltests | -3.37% | -10.64% | -2.25% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > all_utime | +0.33% | +3.73% | +3.33% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > compute | -5.97% | +2.34% | +3.22% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > custom | -31.61% | -10.29% | +15.23% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > disk | +24.64% | +28.96% | +21.28% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > fserver | -1.35% | +4.82% | +9.35% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > high_systime | -6.73% | -6.28% | +12.36% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > shared | -28.31% | -19.99% | -7.10% > > > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > > > short | -44.63% | -37.48% | -33.62% > > > > -----------------------------------------------------
> Thanks a lot, Jason. > > So for this particular set of workloads on a big machine, I think the > result is mixed and overall "neutral", but I expected the variation probably > could be bigger especially for light workloads. > > Any comment from the maintainers and others? Ping Peter and Ben, I haven't > heard from you for the 5th version.
Been a bit busy.. but in general I worry about the performance decrease on the lighter loads. I should probably run some workloads on my 2 socket and 4 socket machines, but the coming few weeks will be very busy and I'm afraid I'll not get around to it in a timely manner.
| |