Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756490AbYAZVpf (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:45:35 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753902AbYAZVpZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:45:25 -0500 Received: from pasmtpa.tele.dk ([80.160.77.114]:45459 "EHLO pasmtpA.tele.dk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753644AbYAZVpZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:45:25 -0500 Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:45:34 +0100 From: Sam Ravnborg To: Toralf =?iso-8859-1?Q?F=F6rster?= , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra Cc: Tomasz Chmielewski , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: (ondemand) CPU governor regression between 2.6.23 and 2.6.24 Message-ID: <20080126214534.GA26651@uranus.ravnborg.org> References: <479B69D2.5050603@wpkg.org> <200801262238.19222.toralf.foerster@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <200801262238.19222.toralf.foerster@gmx.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3076 Lines: 86 Added Ingo + Peter. Sam On Sat, Jan 26, 2008 at 10:38:15PM +0100, Toralf F?rster wrote: > It seems to be rather a scheduler issue than a governor issue b/c > the issue went away after unsetting CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED. > > If I unselect CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED then the %CPU value raises 80% > - which forces the ondemand governor do speed up the CPU frequency: > > > PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND > 7137 tfoerste 20 0 1796 488 428 R 95.5 0.0 0:01.40 factor > 7083 dnetc 39 19 664 348 264 R 2.1 0.0 3:08.33 dnetc > 4033 root 20 0 97252 9420 4008 R 0.7 0.9 0:09.43 X > > > Am Samstag, 26. Januar 2008 schrieben Sie: > > Toralf F?rster wrote: > > > > > I use a 1-liner for a simple performance check : "time factor 819734028463158891" > > > Here is the result for the new (Gentoo) kernel 2.6.24: > > > > > > With the ondemand governor of the I get: > > > > > > tfoerste@n22 ~/tmp $ time factor 819734028463158891 > > > 819734028463158891: 3 273244676154386297 > > > > > > real 0m32.997s > > > user 0m15.732s > > > sys 0m0.014s > > > > > > With the ondemand governor the CPU runs at 600 MHz, > > > whereas with the performance governor I get : > > > > > > tfoerste@n22 ~/tmp $ time factor 819734028463158891 > > > 819734028463158891: 3 273244676154386297 > > > > > > real 0m10.893s > > > user 0m5.444s > > > sys 0m0.000s > > > > > > (~5.5 sec as I expected) b/c the CPU is set to 1.7 GHz. > > > > > > The ondeman governor of previous kernel versions however automatically increased > > > the CPU speed from 600 MHz to 1.7 GHz. > > > > > > My system is a ThinkPad T41, I'll attach the .config > > > > During the test, run top, and watch your CPU usage. Does it go above 80% > > (the default for > > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/ondemand/up_threshold). > > > > ondemand CPUfreq governor has a few tunables, described in > > Documentation/cpu-freq. One of them is up_threshold: > > > > up_threshold: defines what the average CPU usaged between the samplings > > of 'sampling_rate' needs to be for the kernel to make a decision on > > whether it should increase the frequency. For example when it is set > > to its default value of '80' it means that between the checking > > intervals the CPU needs to be on average more than 80% in use to then > > decide that the CPU frequency needs to be increased. > > > > What CPUFreq processor driver are you using? > > > > > > I had a similar problem with CPUfreq and dm-crypt (slow reads), see > > (more setup problem than something kernel-related): > > > > http://blog.wpkg.org/2008/01/22/cpufreq-and-dm-crypt-performance-problems/ > > > > > > -- > MfG/Sincerely > > Toralf F?rster > pgp finger print: 7B1A 07F4 EC82 0F90 D4C2 8936 872A E508 7DB6 9DA3 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/