[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:0.106 / U:2.248 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site