lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [May]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched: wake-affine throttle
On 05/02/2013 03:10 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>>
>> I've done the test for several times, also compared with the throttle
>> approach, default 1ms interval still works very well, the regression on
>> hackbench start to exceed 2% when interval become 100ms on my box, but
>> please note the pgbench already gain a lot benefit at that time.
>>
>> I think now we could say that wake-affine is useful, and we could not
>> simply kill it.
>
> Oh, it's definitely useful. Communicating tasks deeply resent talking
> over interconnects (advanced tin cans and string). My little Q6600 box
> can even be described as dinky-numa given enough imagination.. place
> communicating tasks on different core2 "nodes" if you will, throughput
> falls through the floor. Shared L2 is quick like bunny, dram ain't.

Nice, so we got another proof to defend wake-affine now ;-)

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: 2013-05-02 10:41    [W:0.103 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site