Re: [RFC patch 1/2] sched: dynamically adapt granularity withnr_running

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, 2010-09-12 at 14:16 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

> > Or am I missing your point ?
> 
> Yes and no.  I'm pondering the parent, but by the same token, the 
> vfork child shouldn't be penalized either.
> 
> Does your latency go down drastically if you turn START_DEBIT off? 
> Seems like it should.  Perhaps START_DEBIT should not start a task 
> further right than rightmost.  I've done that before.
> 
> maximum latency: 19221.5 µs
> average latency: 5159.0 µs
> missed timer events: 0
> 
> maximum latency: 43901.0 µs
> average latency: 8430.1 µs
> missed timer events: 0
> 
> Turning it off here cut latency roughly in half (i've piddled vfork 
> though, but not completely).  Limiting child placement to no further 
> right than rightmost should help quite a bit.

Very interesting observation. Mathieu, mind testing Mike's suggestion 
with wakeup-latency.c?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/