lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jan]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 0/2] sched: simplify the select_task_rq_fair()
On 01/12/2013 04:01 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 17:28 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
>> On 12/27/2012 02:08 PM, Michael Wang wrote:
>>> This patch set is trying to simplify the select_task_rq_fair() with
>>> schedule balance map.
>>>
>>> After get rid of the complex code and reorganize the logical, pgbench show
>>> the improvement.
>>>
>>> Prev:
>>> | db_size | clients | tps |
>>> +---------+---------+-------+
>>> | 22 MB | 1 | 4437 |
>>> | 22 MB | 16 | 51351 |
>>> | 22 MB | 32 | 49959 |
>>> | 7484 MB | 1 | 4078 |
>>> | 7484 MB | 16 | 44681 |
>>> | 7484 MB | 32 | 42463 |
>>> | 15 GB | 1 | 3992 |
>>> | 15 GB | 16 | 44107 |
>>> | 15 GB | 32 | 41797 |
>>>
>>> Post:
>>> | db_size | clients | tps |
>>> +---------+---------+-------+
>>> | 22 MB | 1 | 11053 | +149.11%
>>> | 22 MB | 16 | 55671 | +8.41%
>>> | 22 MB | 32 | 52596 | +5.28%
>>> | 7483 MB | 1 | 8180 | +100.59%
>>> | 7483 MB | 16 | 48392 | +8.31%
>>> | 7483 MB | 32 | 44185 | +0.18%
>>> | 15 GB | 1 | 8127 | +103.58%
>>> | 15 GB | 16 | 48156 | +9.18%
>>> | 15 GB | 32 | 43387 | +3.8%
>>>
>>> Please check the patch for more details about schedule balance map, they
>>> currently based on linux-next 3.7.0-rc6, will rebase them to tip tree in
>>> follow version.
>>>
>>> Comments are very welcomed.
>>
>> Could I get some comments for this patch set?
>
> I kinda like it. It doesn't bounce buddies all over a large package at
> low load, doesn't have a tbench dip at clients=cores with HT enabled
> that my idle buddy patch does, and your pgbench numbers look very nice.
> It's not as good at ramp as idle buddies, but is an improvement over
> mainline for both tbench and pgbench. Cool.
>
> It'll schedule client/server cross node sometimes with you preferring to
> leave wakee near prev_cpu, but that's one of those things that can bite
> whichever choice you make. It kills the bounce problem, can't hurt
> little boxen, and may help big boxen more often than it hurts, who
> knows.
>
> Some tbench numbers:
>
> I had to plug it into 3.0 to play with it, the 3.6-stable kernel I had
> been using on 4x10 core box is misbehaving.

Hi, Mike

Thanks for your reply and test results.

>
> mainline = upstream select_idle_sibling()
> idle_buddy = upstream select_idle_sibling() with 37407ea7 reverted
>
> clients 1 5 10 20 40 80 160
> 3.0.57-mainline 30.76 146.29 1569.48 4396.10 7851.87 14065.90 14128.40
> 3.0.57-idle_buddy 291.69 1448.13 2874.62 5329.49 7311.44 13582.20 13927.50
> 3.0.57-mainline+wang 292.41 1085.70 2048.62 4342.16 8280.17 13494.60 13435.50
>
> It'd be nice to see more numbers, likely there will be plus/minus all
> the map, but from my quick test drive, generic behavior looks healthier.

It's good to know that you like the idea, I will re-base the code on
latest tip tree and do more test on it.

Regards,
Michael Wang

>
> -Mike
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-01-15 04:21    [W:0.214 / U:0.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site