Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: linux.kernel
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched,time: call __acct_update_integrals once a jiffy
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2016 21:40:02 +0100
Message-ID: <qWKtk-Mu-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
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>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: robomod@news.nic.it
Approved: robomod@news.nic.it
Lines: 49
Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway
Xref: csiph.com linux.kernel:1322506

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;