Messages in this thread | | | From | Aubrey Li <> | Date | Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:40:02 +0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/19] Core scheduling v4 |
| |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:34 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:32:35PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote: > > Aaron - did you test this before? In other words, if you reset repo to your > > last commit: > > I did this test only recently when I started to think if I can use > coresched to boost main workload's performance in a colocated > environment. > > > > > - 5bd3c80 sched/fair : Wake up forced idle siblings if needed > > > > Does the problem remain? Just want to check if this is a regression > > introduced by the subsequent patchset. > > The problem isn't there with commit 5bd3c80 as the head, so yes, it > looks like indeed a regression introduced by subsequent patchset. > > P.S. I will need to take a closer look if each cgA's task is running > on a different core later but the cpu usage of cgA is back to 800% with > commit 5bd3c80.
Hmm..., I went through the subsequent patches, and I think this one
- 4041eeb8f3 sched/fair: don't migrate task if cookie not match
is probably the major cause, can you please revert this one to see if the problem is gone?
From what I can tell, if 16 threads in cgB occupied 8 cores, this patch prevents any thread in cgA from migrating when load balance is triggered, and yes, cpu.shares is ignored at this point.
Thanks, -Aubrey
| |