Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: VolanoMark regression with 2.6.27-rc1 | From | "Zhang, Yanmin" <> | Date | Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:24:49 +0800 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-08-18 at 10:51 +0530, Dhaval Giani wrote: > > > > > > So with kernel 2.6.27-rc1, the successful wakeup_affine is about > > > > > > double of the one of 2.6.27-rc1 > > > > > > on domain 0, but about 10 times on domain 1. That means more tasks are > > > > > > woken up on waker cpus. > > > > > > > > > > > > Does that mean it doesn't follow cache-hot checking? > > > > > > > > > > I'm a bit puzzled, but you're right - I too noticed that volanomark is > > > > > _very_ sensitive to affine wakeups. > > > > > > > > > > I'll try and find what changed in that code for GROUP=n. > > > > > > > > hi Yanmin, > > > > > > > > I was wondering if you could send me your config and what sysctls you > > > > have set. I have not been able to reproduce the 2.6.26 -> 2.6.27-rc1 > > > > GROUP=n regression. > > > Pls. see the attachment. As for sysctl, I just set /proc/sys/kernel/sched_compat_yield=1. > > > > > > I am wondering if the load balance causes the regression when group=n. I manually delete > > > all GROUP codes and do a diff against 26 and 27-rc1. > > > > > > > You can disable load balancing by being in uniprocessor mode. > > > > Hi, > > I can see this regression only with sched_compat_yield=1. Some numbers > though, I see a 5% regression with max_cpus=1 whereas close to 50% with > SMP on a 8 way. After reverting below patch, volanoMark regression becomes less than 2% with CONFIG_GROUP_SCHED=n on my 8-core stoakely. The improvement on 16-core tigerton is about 44%, but there is still about 20% regression, comparing with 2.6.26_nogroup.
commit 93b75217df39e6d75889cc6f8050343286aff4a5 Author: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Date: Fri Jun 27 13:41:33 2008 +0200
sched: disable source/target_load bias
The bias given by source/target_load functions can be very large, disable it by default to get faster convergence.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
This patch adds a new feature LB_BIAS, but uses it with a NOT, so I lost it when I tested single sched feature one by one. That also explains why wake_affine and load_balance_newidle have more successful task pulling with kernel 2.6.27-rc, because MC and CPU domain's wake_idx is 1, so this patch has impact on them.
Dhaval, could you test it on your 8-way machine?
> > Peter do you have any patches already, which I can try? > > Thanks,
| |