Received: by 2002:a25:868d:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id z13csp1645342ybk; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:41:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyCHitkAhIzAX+P902kloDotZMz+lC81C0AMV7s8iUiQg3QotbrbFaQggBIQrMbhSpsogZG X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b2c5:: with SMTP id cf5mr4534645ejb.465.1590086499519; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:41:39 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1590086499; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=nZg/ccGEuVFMytUj8FeSzcIdxTyQ4MTHXNkRgYCfJMaWDzOoJ8msOoYW+nakveW7r1 aNz5zqsHH95oQWgoqOy5ilHoj9FhkQQFnqieaaFdj/l2D7neTVlD3uvmZ+AcWheKSt0E x/Iiwm5RNGpJ/wD+EmO4U8g5ir3JSQpiLvIqPgoH+aqCG/kcRfDoSlL6ghNYQMlNf6RS s8+dgRZ1ebZVI560IbSfX/y5KuJEmlWX4bq1ItMlj/mBtCzmCKszGwrIsUlFvtLlSsp4 tpseWaF4gzV2t+384ctVErr5m8bK83qO2phpNv66fmBxc3h8MW+ghHUHOD7K+UmevX4Q a1kQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=Yrft6eXy+aY+C/nmbJKmKuZKyTimjGnAiz9JkgNsSbY=; b=SKNF7poGQFR7DEpr/8zmYCNKKoDbcQapW3fp7JpAHUegoaPs5lr7lfOKiOWH+epwCu EWs+uoZja06NNQGF2Su7XFd0cHFGelZL6YjXsezt75qilWTKjr9DymxDaaLBLsigUuTY j4o6IWa+Rm5NH/VCN7K1lVCqIQXQjwRNK/oRpVP/p26N6VaWLXnefDVp/KGzkGYx6yjF yMbFWt59Udr8ABeO8C2d/sJjfWSjmd+XwscesYy2luEa8SQUd4jyQChBAm3ijmbEpjEh nIU3oomh6PlVpB79ie7bQECAOzHs9+uwAfcFlBVXMCsksHdc1uFr3UVOdHatAiV/OPOT lkxw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.s=google header.b=hSVTTmym; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id l26si3452634ejx.390.2020.05.21.11.41.16; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:41:39 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.s=google header.b=hSVTTmym; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729820AbgEUSiu (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 21 May 2020 14:38:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37638 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729793AbgEUSit (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2020 14:38:49 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x541.google.com (mail-ed1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::541]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 77B7DC061A0F for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:38:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x541.google.com with SMTP id l5so7358993edn.7 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:38:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux-foundation.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Yrft6eXy+aY+C/nmbJKmKuZKyTimjGnAiz9JkgNsSbY=; b=hSVTTmym1pgL9YcNpVDIJBWF6WU0hQ91UA8xDxq8K8H18M/aZmUq/ehn5QhJzi6OSO jgDf9RIy4iDoFVM+3CP9qUB0XaV2kJzGcfpJMwvqCu3CWxmG2Sn3g20Dzb9Zjil0FiVX xX6BwQrCtncslZ+6UNswXHyLa1VJK+8+P/OCE= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Yrft6eXy+aY+C/nmbJKmKuZKyTimjGnAiz9JkgNsSbY=; b=LygSzrQ+UFoLP+x1h/Vn9DWnDV8KOlltyR0Xfoe6nx4nWhWrv8YVSuyHv9d0fZvyOL iNCaatePWhZ/TCIo2zjv6RMWgaHrCDLMqOrbqxnGDnVr/8YQuYzvifh6QaSXYo/CMigx ez3o4cZs5pu/WouElEKTsWMvgh25hLKlM7qTDiQsr7nfju6C1seKc47hpkOkkJzAoc8U 7Z+noKpgLAIrjesIs3yLXW60MSc7bUV6Zi8oj2y+dvanGFvgIiDWpm4M6KTJgkmS81Be 3gvZ7voKNxRdIDcQbMTp/bFZ1VgGe4Efxgmc1IyB+EEhP+Bjcsqolaf9tPc3TSrwq66Z 46vg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532Lo1NP56Rp0OldKleEZ5j9/pHVmEf45lzyXOZ4ahMkWdAlX0MF JJXj889bLEKT7xt430EPBCL8lIMXBFQ= X-Received: by 2002:a50:88c6:: with SMTP id d64mr40612edd.324.1590086327585; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ej1-f51.google.com (mail-ej1-f51.google.com. [209.85.218.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h19sm5494096ejb.66.2020.05.21.11.38.47 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 21 May 2020 11:38:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-f51.google.com with SMTP id x1so10040746ejd.8 for ; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:38:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a2e:7e0a:: with SMTP id z10mr3496127ljc.314.1590085914996; Thu, 21 May 2020 11:31:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200520222642.70679-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> In-Reply-To: <20200520222642.70679-1-joel@joelfernandes.org> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 11:31:38 -0700 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] sched: Add a per-thread core scheduling interface To: "Joel Fernandes (Google)" Cc: Nishanth Aravamudan , Julien Desfossez , Peter Zijlstra , Tim Chen , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , vpillai , Linux Kernel Mailing List , =?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBXZWlzYmVja2Vy?= , Kees Cook , Greg Kerr , Phil Auld , Aaron Lu , Aubrey Li , aubrey.li@linux.intel.com, Valentin Schneider , Mel Gorman , Pawan Gupta , Paolo Bonzini , Joel Fernandes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 3:26 PM Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote: > > ChromeOS will use core-scheduling to securely enable hyperthreading. > This cuts down the keypress latency in Google docs from 150ms to 50ms > while improving the camera streaming frame rate by ~3%. I'm assuming this is "compared to SMT disabled"? What is the cost compared to "SMT enabled but no core scheduling"? But the real reason I'm piping up is that your latency benchmark sounds very cool. Generally throughput benchmarks are much easier to do, how do you do this latency benchmark, and is it perhaps something that could be run more widely (ie I'm thinking that if it's generic enough and stable enough to be run by some of the performance regression checking robots, it would be a much more interesting test-case than some of the ones they run right now...) I'm looking at that "threaded phoronix gzip performance regression" thread due to a totally unrelated scheduling change ("sched/fair: Rework load_balance()"), and then I see this thread and my reaction is "the keypress latency thing sounds like a much more interesting performance test than threaded gzip from clear linux". But the threaded gzip test is presumably trivial to script, while your latency test is perhaps very specific to one particular platform and setuip? Linus