lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Feb]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] sched: The removal of idle_balance()
From
Date
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 08:14 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:

> (And puts a dent in x264 ultrafast)
>
> +SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE
> encoded 600 frames, 425.04 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 416.07 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 417.49 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 420.65 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 425.55 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 425.58 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 426.18 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 424.21 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 422.20 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 423.15 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
>
> -SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE
> encoded 600 frames, 378.52 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 378.75 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 378.20 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 372.54 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 366.69 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 378.46 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 379.89 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 382.25 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 384.10 fps, 22132.71 kb/s
> encoded 600 frames, 375.24 fps, 22132.71 kb/s

What about my last patch? The one that avoids idle_balance() if the
previous task was in a task_uninterruptible state. That one gave the
same performance increase that removing idle_balance() did on my box.

-- Steve





\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-02-17 23:41    [W:0.064 / U:0.500 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site