Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759451Ab1FXPFu (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:05:50 -0400 Received: from e28smtp09.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.9]:52185 "EHLO e28smtp09.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758753Ab1FXPFm (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2011 11:05:42 -0400 Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:35:33 +0530 From: Kamalesh Babulal To: Paul Turner Cc: Vladimir Davydov , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra , Bharata B Rao , Dhaval Giani , Vaidyanathan Srinivasan , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , Ingo Molnar , Pavel Emelianov Subject: Re: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vs unpinned Message-ID: <20110624150533.GB1519@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: Kamalesh Babulal References: <20110503092846.022272244@google.com> <20110607154542.GA2991@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1307529966.4928.8.camel@dhcp-10-30-22-158.sw.ru> <20110608163234.GA23031@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110610181719.GA30330@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20110615053716.GA390@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2000 Lines: 69 * Paul Turner [2011-06-21 12:48:17]: > Hi Kamalesh, > > Can you see what things look like under v7? > > There's been a few improvements to quota re-distribution that should > hopefully help your test case. > > The remaining idle% I see on my machines appear to be a product of > load-balancer inefficiency. > > Thanks! > > - Paul (snip) Hi Paul, Sorry for the delay in the response. I tried the V7 patchset on top of tip. Patchset passed different combinations build and boot tests. I have re-run the tests with couple of combinations on the same 2 socket,4 core, HT box. The test data was collected for 60 seconds run un-pinned and cpu shares of 1024 ------------------------------------------------- Top five cgroups and its sub-cgroups were assigned default cpu shares of 1024. Average CPU Idle percentage 21.8333% Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 78.1667% un-pinned and cpu shares are proportional -------------------------------------------------- Top five cgroups were assigned cpu shares proportional to no of sub-cgroups it has under its hierarchy. For example cgroup1's share is (1024*2) = 2048 and each sub-cgroups has shares of 1024. Average CPU Idle percentage 14.2% Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 85.8% pinned and cpu shares of 1024 -------------------------------------------------- Average CPU Idle percentage 0.0666667% Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 99.9333333% pinned and cpu shares are proportional -------------------------------------------------- Average CPU Idle percentage 0% Bandwidth shared with remaining non-Idle 100% I have captured the perf sched stats for every run. Let me know if that will help. I can mail them to you privately. Thanks, Kamalesh. -- 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/