Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1425362 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-17 19:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2016-06-21 10:40 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH 0/5] sched/debug: decouple sched_stat tracepoints from CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2016-06-17 19:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 0/5] sched/debug: decouple sched_stat tracepoints from CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-06-21 10:40 +0200
| From | Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 19:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH 0/5] sched/debug: decouple sched_stat tracepoints from CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS |
| Message-ID | <rL641-15V-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
NOTE: I didn't include any performance numbers because I wasn't able to
get consistent results. I tried the following on a Xeon E5-2420 v2 CPU:
$ for i in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor; do echo -n performance > $i; done
$ echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/no_turbo
$ echo 100 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/min_perf_pct
$ echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog
$ taskset 0x10 perf stat -n -r10 perf bench sched pipe -l 1000000
I was going to post the numbers from that, both with and without
SCHEDSTATS, but then when I tried to repeat the test on a different day,
the results were surprisingly different, with different conclusions.
So any advice on measuring scheduler performance would be appreciated...
Josh Poimboeuf (5):
sched/debug: rename and move enqueue_sleeper()
sched/debug: schedstat macro cleanup
sched/debug: 'schedstat_val()' -> 'schedstat_val_or_zero()'
sched/debug: remove several CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS guards
sched/debug: decouple 'sched_stat_*' tracepoints' from
CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS
include/linux/sched.h | 11 +-
kernel/latencytop.c | 2 -
kernel/profile.c | 5 -
kernel/sched/core.c | 59 ++++------
kernel/sched/debug.c | 104 +++++++++--------
kernel/sched/fair.c | 290 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
kernel/sched/idle_task.c | 2 +-
kernel/sched/stats.h | 24 ++--
lib/Kconfig.debug | 1 -
9 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 278 deletions(-)
--
2.4.11
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-21 10:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] sched/debug: decouple sched_stat tracepoints from CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS |
| Message-ID | <rMpnX-3mT-25@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1425362 |
* Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> [2016-06-17 12:43:22]: > NOTE: I didn't include any performance numbers because I wasn't able to > get consistent results. I tried the following on a Xeon E5-2420 v2 CPU: > > $ for i in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor; do echo -n performance > $i; done > $ echo 1 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/no_turbo > $ echo 100 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/intel_pstate/min_perf_pct > $ echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/nmi_watchdog > $ taskset 0x10 perf stat -n -r10 perf bench sched pipe -l 1000000 > > I was going to post the numbers from that, both with and without > SCHEDSTATS, but then when I tried to repeat the test on a different day, > the results were surprisingly different, with different conclusions. > > So any advice on measuring scheduler performance would be appreciated... > > Josh Poimboeuf (5): > sched/debug: rename and move enqueue_sleeper() > sched/debug: schedstat macro cleanup > sched/debug: 'schedstat_val()' -> 'schedstat_val_or_zero()' > sched/debug: remove several CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS guards > sched/debug: decouple 'sched_stat_*' tracepoints' from > CONFIG_SCHEDSTATS > This patchset looks good to me. Acked-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> -- Thanks and Regards Srikar Dronamraju
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web