Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1322506
| From | Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy |
| Date | 2016-01-30 21:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qWKtk-Mu-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qWq1z-1yb-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWq1z-1yb-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWq1B-1yb-43@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWEHg-4rE-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWHYv-7qu-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sat, Jan 30, 2016 at 06:53:05PM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-01-30 at 15:20 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 05:43:28PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>
> > > Run times for the microbenchmark:
> > >
> > > 4.4 3.8 seconds
> > > 4.5-rc1 3.7 seconds
> > > 4.5-rc1 + first patch 3.3 seconds
> > > 4.5-rc1 + both patches 2.3 seconds
> >
> > Very nice improvement!
>
> Tasty indeed.
>
> When nohz_full CPUs are not isolated, ie are being used as generic
> CPUs, get_nohz_timer_target() is a problem with things like tbench.
So by isolated CPU you mean those part of isolcpus= boot option, right?
>
> tbench 8 with Rik's patches applied:
> nohz_full=empty
> Throughput 3204.69 MB/sec 1.000
> nohz_full=1-3,5-7
> Throughput 1354.99 MB/sec .422 1.000
> nohz_full=1-3,5-7 + club below
> Throughput 2762.22 MB/sec .861 2.038
>
> With Rik's patches and a club, tbench becomes nearly acceptable.
> ---
> include/linux/tick.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- a/include/linux/tick.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tick.h
> @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ static inline const struct cpumask *hous
> static inline bool is_housekeeping_cpu(int cpu)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
> - if (tick_nohz_full_enabled())
> + if (tick_nohz_full_enabled() && runqueue_is_isolated(cpu))
> return cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, housekeeping_mask);
This makes me confused. How forcing timers to CPUs in isolcpus is making
better results?
> #endif
> return true;
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy riel@redhat.com - 2016-01-29 23:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-01-29 23:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 15:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 19:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> - 2016-01-30 21:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 04:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> - 2016-01-31 06:40 +0100
csiph-web