Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [patch 00/17] CFS Bandwidth Control v7.1 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Thu, 07 Jul 2011 13:28:21 +0200 |
| |
On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Well, the most recent run Hu Tao sent (with lockdep disabled) are > different: > > table 2. shows the differences between patch and no-patch. quota is set > to a large value to avoid processes being throttled. > > quota/period cycles instructions branches > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > base 1,146,384,132 1,151,216,688 212,431,532 > patch cgroup disabled 1,163,717,547 (1.51%) 1,165,238,015 ( 1.22%) 215,092,327 ( 1.25%) > patch 10000000000/1000 1,244,889,136 (8.59%) 1,299,128,502 (12.85%) 243,162,542 (14.47%) > patch 10000000000/10000 1,253,305,706 (9.33%) 1,299,167,897 (12.85%) 243,175,027 (14.47%) > patch 10000000000/100000 1,252,374,134 (9.25%) 1,299,314,357 (12.86%) 243,203,923 (14.49%) > patch 10000000000/1000000 1,254,165,824 (9.40%) 1,299,751,347 (12.90%) 243,288,600 (14.53%) > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > The +1.5% increase in vanilla kernel context switching performance is > unfortunate - where does that overhead come from? > > The +9% increase in cgroups context-switching overhead looks rather > brutal.
As to those, do they run pipe-test in a cgroup or are you always using the root cgroup?
| |