lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: Scheduler(?) regression from 2.6.22 to 2.6.24 for short-lived threads
From
Date

On Mon, 2008-02-11 at 11:26 -0600, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2008 at 09:15:55AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Piddling around with your testcase, it still looks to me like things
> > improved considerably in latest greatest git. Hopefully that means
> > happiness is in the pipe for the real workload... synthetic load is
> > definitely happier here as burst is shortened.
>
> The real workload doesn't see much of an improvement. The changes I did
> when tinkering yesterday seem like they're better at modelling just
> what's going on with that one.

So the real application is trying to yield? If so, you could try
prodding /proc/sys/kernel/sched_compat_yield.

It shouldn't matter if you yield or not really, that should reduce the
number of non-work spin cycles wasted awaiting preemption as threads
execute in series (the problem), and should improve your performance
numbers, but not beyond single threaded.

If I plugged a yield into the busy wait, I would expect to see a large
behavioral difference due to yield implementation changes, but that
would only be a symptom in this case, no? Yield should be a noop.

-Mike



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-11 21:23    [W:0.078 / U:0.420 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site