Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 15 Sep 2019 22:14:02 +0800 | From | Aaron Lu <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/16] Core scheduling v3 |
| |
On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 07:12:52AM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote: > On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 8:04 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 09:19:02AM -0700, Tim Chen wrote: > > > On 9/11/19 7:02 AM, Aaron Lu wrote: > > > I think Julien's result show that my patches did not do as well as > > > your patches for fairness. Aubrey did some other testing with the same > > > conclusion. So I think keeping the forced idle time balanced is not > > > enough for maintaining fairness. > > > > Well, I have done following tests: > > 1 Julien's test script: https://paste.debian.net/plainh/834cf45c > > 2 start two tagged will-it-scale/page_fault1, see how each performs; > > 3 Aubrey's mysql test: https://github.com/aubreyli/coresched_bench.git > > > > They all show your patchset performs equally well...And consider what > > the patch does, I think they are really doing the same thing in > > different ways. > > It looks like we are not on the same page, if you don't mind, can both of > you rebase your patchset onto v5.3-rc8 and provide a public branch so I > can fetch and test it at least by my benchmark?
I'm using the following branch as base which is v5.1.5 based: https://github.com/digitalocean/linux-coresched coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test
And I have pushed Tim's branch to: https://github.com/aaronlu/linux coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test-tim
Mine: https://github.com/aaronlu/linux coresched-v3-v5.1.5-test-core_vruntime
The two branches both have two patches I have sent previouslly: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190810141556.GA73644@aaronlu/ Although it has some potential performance loss as pointed out by Vineeth, I haven't got time to rework it yet.
| |