Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1596274
| From | David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements |
| Date | 2017-03-09 19:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <tjaFH-ma-15@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <titAK-46W-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <tiwIi-6lb-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <tiGoh-4Ft-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tiO2t-1rn-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <tj47h-4lW-57@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 3:01 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > On Wed, 8 Mar 2017, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 12:30 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: >> > Same applies for per CPU measurements. >> >> For CPU measurements. We need perf-like CPU filtering to support tools >> that perform low overhead monitoring by polling CPU events. These >> tools approximate per-cgroup/task events by reconciling CPU events >> with logs of what job run when in what CPU. > > Sorry, but for CQM that's just voodoo analysis. I'll argue that. Yet, perf-like CPU is also needed for MBM, a less contentious scenario, I believe. > > CPU default is CAT group 0 (20% of cache) > T1 belongs to CAT group 1 (40% of cache) > T2 belongs to CAT group 2 (40% of cache) > > Now you do low overhead samples of the CPU (all groups accounted) with 1 > second period. > > Lets assume that T1 runs 50% and T2 runs 20% the rest of the time is > utilized by random other things and the kernel itself (using CAT group 0). > > What is the accumulated value telling you? In this single example not much, only the sum of occupancies. But assume I have T1...T10000 different jobs, and I randomly select a pair of those jobs to run together in a machine, (they become the T1 and T2 in your example). Then I repeat that hundreds of thousands of times. I can collect all data with (tasks run, time run, occupancy) and build a simple regression to estimate the expected occupancy (and some confidence interval). That inaccurate but approximate value is very useful to feed into a job scheduler. Furthermore, it can be correlated with values of other events that are currently sampled this way. > > How do you approximate that back to T1/T2 and the rest? Described above for large numbers and random samples. More sophisticated (voodo?) statistic techniques are employed in practice to account for almost all issues I could think of (selection bias, missing values, interaction between tasks, etc). They seem to work fine. > > How do you do that when the tasks are switching between the samples several > times? It does not work well for a single run (your example). But for the example I gave, one can just rely on Random Sampling, Law of Large Numbers, and Central Limit Theorem. Thanks, David
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
RE: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com> - 2017-03-07 21:10 +0100
RE: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-07 21:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2017-03-08 00:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Shivappa Vikas <vikas.shivappa@intel.com> - 2017-03-08 01:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-08 10:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com> - 2017-03-08 19:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-09 12:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com> - 2017-03-09 19:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-10 16:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com> - 2017-03-11 03:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-13 20:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com> - 2017-03-13 21:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> - 2017-03-13 21:30 +0100
csiph-web