Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1577873

Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:22 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 08, 2017 at 09:43:29AM +0100, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
>> From: Uladzislau 2 Rezki <uladzislau2.rezki@sonymobile.com>
>>
>> A load balancer calculates imbalance factor for particular shed
>> domain and tries to steal up the prescribed amount of weighted load.
>> However, a small imbalance factor would sometimes prevent us from
>> stealing any tasks at all. When a CPU is newly idle, it should
>> steal first task which passes a migration criteria.
>>

>
> So ideally we'd reduce the number of special cases instead of increase
> them.
>
I agree.

>
> Does this patch make an actual difference, if so how much and with
> what workload?
>
Yes, it does. I see a slight improvement when it comes to frame drops
(in my case drops per/two seconds). Basically a test case is left finger
swipe on the display (21 times, duration is 2 seconds + 1 second sleep
between iterations):

0   Framedrops:  7    5
1   Framedrops:  5    3
2   Framedrops:  8    5
3   Framedrops:  4    5
4   Framedrops:  3    3
5   Framedrops:  6    4
6   Framedrops:  3    2
7   Framedrops:  3    4
8   Framedrops:  5    3
9   Framedrops:  3    3
10 Framedrops:  7    4
11 Framedrops:  3    4
12 Framedrops:  3    3
13 Framedrops:  3    3
14 Framedrops:  3    5
15 Framedrops:  7    3
16 Framedrops:  5    3
17 Framedrops:  3    2
18 Framedrops:  5    3
19 Framedrops:  4    3
20 Framedrops:  3    2

max is 8 vs 5; min is 2 vs 3.

As for applied load, it is not significant and i would say is "light".

--
Uladzislau Rezki

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[RFC,v2 1/3] sched: set loop_max after rq lock is taken Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 10:00 +0100
  [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 10:00 +0100
    Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> - 2017-02-08 10:50 +0100
      Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 11:20 +0100
    Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-09 13:30 +0100
      Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 20:10 +0100
        Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-13 15:00 +0100
          Re: [RFC,v2 3/3] sched: ignore task_h_load for CPU_NEWLY_IDLE Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> - 2017-02-13 18:20 +0100
  Re: [RFC,v2 1/3] sched: set loop_max after rq lock is taken Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2017-02-09 14:40 +0100

csiph-web