Re: CFS Bandwidth Control - Test results of cgroups tasks pinned vsunpinnede

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 01:14 -0700, Paul Turner wrote:
> On 09/13/11 11:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-09-13 at 23:31 +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> >> * Peter Zijlstra<a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>  [2011-09-13 16:19:39]:
> >>
> >>>> Booting with "nohz=off" also helps significantly.
> >>>>
> >>>> With nohz=on, average idle time (over 1 min) is 10.3%
> >>>> With nohz=off, average idle time (over 1 min) is 3.9%
> 
> I think more compelling here is that it looks like nohz load-balance 
> needs more love.

Quite probable, although I do know we tend to go overboard in going into
nohz state too.

> > That's not what I said.. what I said is that the nohz code should also
> > use the idle time prognosis.. disabling the tick is a costly operation,
> > doing it only to have to undo it costs time, and will be accounted to
> > idle time, hence your improvement with nohz=off.
> >
> 
> Enabling Venki's CONFIG_IRQ_TIME_ACCOUNTING=y would discount to provide 
> a definitive answer here yes?

Ah, yes, its all (soft)irq context anyway, no need to also account
systemcalls.
--
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/