Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754061AbYHTHlc (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:41:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752028AbYHTHlW (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:41:22 -0400 Received: from viefep32-int.chello.at ([62.179.121.50]:36435 "EHLO viefep32-int.chello.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752005AbYHTHlV (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:41:21 -0400 Subject: Re: VolanoMark regression with 2.6.27-rc1 From: Peter Zijlstra To: "Zhang, Yanmin" Cc: Dhaval Giani , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Aneesh Kumar KV , Balbir Singh , Chris Friesen In-Reply-To: <1219217089.8781.27.camel@ymzhang> References: <1217828278.25608.206.camel@ymzhang> <20080804055339.GB5444@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1217831171.9016.42.camel@twins> <20080804070508.GA4028@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1217833939.9016.47.camel@twins> <1912217169.25608.228.camel@ymzhang> <1218180605.8625.64.camel@twins> <20080811185008.GA29291@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1912726331.25608.235.camel@ymzhang> <20080817115035.GA32223@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080818052155.GA5063@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1219217089.8781.27.camel@ymzhang> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:41:29 +0200 Message-Id: <1219218089.10800.404.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3499 Lines: 88 On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 15:24 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > 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 > 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 > Cc: Srivatsa Vaddagiri > Cc: Mike Galbraith > Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar > > > > 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? Ah - I assumed you already tried that knob since you mentioned fiddling with the various feature flags. And I must admit to having overlooked the effect on wake_affine.. Chris, could you see the effect of this on smp group fairness? --- diff --git a/kernel/sched_features.h b/kernel/sched_features.h index 862b06b..9353ca7 100644 --- a/kernel/sched_features.h +++ b/kernel/sched_features.h @@ -8,6 +8,6 @@ SCHED_FEAT(SYNC_WAKEUPS, 1) SCHED_FEAT(HRTICK, 1) SCHED_FEAT(DOUBLE_TICK, 0) SCHED_FEAT(ASYM_GRAN, 1) -SCHED_FEAT(LB_BIAS, 0) +SCHED_FEAT(LB_BIAS, 1) SCHED_FEAT(LB_WAKEUP_UPDATE, 1) SCHED_FEAT(ASYM_EFF_LOAD, 1) -- 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/