Hi Tejun,
On 04/05/17 18:39, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dietmar.
>
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:49:51AM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
>> On 04/05/17 07:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
[...]
>>
>> I can't recreate this problem running
Hello, Dietmar.
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:49:51AM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 04/05/17 07:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >> Urgh, and my numbers were so pretty :/
> >
> > Just to clarify on how to run schbench, I limit
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 10:49:51AM +0100, Dietmar Eggemann wrote:
> On 04/05/17 07:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >> Urgh, and my numbers were so pretty :/
> >
> > Just to clarify on how to run schbench, I limited to a single so
Le Wednesday 03 May 2017 à 20:00:28 (+0200), Peter Zijlstra a écrit :
>
[snip]
>
> Just FUDGE2 on its own seems to be the best on my system and is a change
> that makes sense (and something Paul recently pointed out as well).
>
> The implementation isn't particularly pretty or fast, but shoul
On 04/05/17 07:21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> Urgh, and my numbers were so pretty :/
>
> Just to clarify on how to run schbench, I limited to a single socket (as
> that is what you have) and set -t to the number of cores in the soc
On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 07:51:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Urgh, and my numbers were so pretty :/
Just to clarify on how to run schbench, I limited to a single socket (as
that is what you have) and set -t to the number of cores in the socket
(not the number of threads).
Furthermore, my ma
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:45:46PM -0400, Tejun Heo wrote:
> FUDGE2: Changes things a lot (load values go wild) but only because
> it's missing scale_load_down(). After adding
> scale_load_down(), it doesn't do much. For this to work, it
> needs to be always propagated, w
Hello, Peter.
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:00:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Just FUDGE2 on its own seems to be the best on my system and is a change
> that makes sense (and something Paul recently pointed out as well).
>
> The implementation isn't particularly pretty or fast, but should
> ill
This is on my IVB-EP, 2 sockets, 10 cores / socket, 2 threads / core.
workload is constrained to 1 socket.
root@ivb-ep:~/bench/schbench# numactl -N 0 ./schbench -m 2 -t 10 -s 1 -c
15000 -r 30
Latency percentiles (usec)
50.th: 21
75.th: 30
90.th: 38
09a43ace1f98 ("sched/fair: Propagate load during synchronous
attach/detach") added immediate load propagation from cfs_rq to its
sched_entity then to the parent cfs_rq; however, what gets propagated
doesn't seem to make sense.
It repeats the tg_weight calculation done in calc_cfs_shares() but
only
10 matches
Mail list logo
