lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Sep]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not decay new task load on first enqueue
On Fri, 23 Sep, at 04:30:25PM, Vincent Guittot wrote:
>
> Does it mean that you can see the perf drop that you mention below
> because load is decayed to 1002 instead of staying to 1024 ?

The performance drop comes from the fact that enqueueing/dequeueing a
task with load 1002 during fork() results in a zero runnable_load_avg,
which signals to the load balancer that the CPU is idle, so the next
time we fork() we'll pick the same CPU to enqueue on -- and the cycle
continues.

I mention the performance regression mainly because it's the thing
that led to me discovering this bug, and only a little as support for
applying the patch ;-)

> 1002 mainly comes from period_contrib being set to 1023 during
> init_entity_runnable_average so any delay longer than 1us between
> attach_entity_load_avg and enqueue_entity_load_avg will trig the decay
> of the load from 1024 to 1002

Right.

> But this patch doesn't change the behavior of runnable_load_avg, isn't
> it ? it has only an impact on the initial value of p->se.avg.load_avg
> when the task is enqueued.

Correct. It isn't guaranteed that runnable_load_avg will be non-zero
with this patch applied, that was just the case for the workload and
the machine I tested.

> > Arguably the real problem is that balancing on fork doesn't look at
> > the blocked contribution of tasks, only the runnable load and it's
> > possible for the two metrics to be wildly different on a relatively
> > idle system.
>
> fair enough

I did have some patches somewhere to address this. I'll have to dig
them out.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-27 21:21    [W:0.210 / U:8.948 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site