From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
bristot@redhat.com, vschneid@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "kprateek.nayak" <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>, tglx@linutronix.de
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 07:57:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b2487403dafb09fbdfb0075123fc3fda8ab7636.camel@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240405110010.631664251@infradead.org>
(removes apparently busted bytedance.com address and retries xmit)
Greetings!
With this version, the better CPU distribution (for tbench synchronous
net-blasting) closed the CFS vs EEVDF throughput deficit. I verified
both by rolling the previous version forward and back-porting to 6.1
where I've got CFS and EEVDF to re-compare, now with both dequeue delay
patch versions.
As usual, there will be winners and losers, but (modulo dead buglet) it
looks kinda promising to me.
Distribution of single pinned buddy pair measured in master:
DELAY_DEQUEUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Task | Runtime ms | Switches | Avg delay ms | Max delay ms | Sum delay ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tbench:(2) | 6277.099 ms | 1597104 | avg: 0.003 ms | max: 0.129 ms | sum: 4334.723 ms |
tbench_srv:(2) | 5724.971 ms | 1682629 | avg: 0.001 ms | max: 0.083 ms | sum: 2076.616 ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL: | 12021.128 ms | 3280275 | | 1.729 ms | 6425.483 ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
client/server CPU distribution ~52%/48%
NO_DELAY_DEQUEUE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Task | Runtime ms | Switches | Avg delay ms | Max delay ms | Sum delay ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
tbench:(2) | 6724.774 ms | 1546761 | avg: 0.002 ms | max: 0.409 ms | sum: 2443.549 ms |
tbench_srv:(2) | 5275.329 ms | 1571688 | avg: 0.002 ms | max: 0.086 ms | sum: 2734.151 ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL: | 12019.641 ms | 3119000 | | 9996.367 ms | 15187.833 ms |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
client/server CPU distribution ~56%/44%
Note switches and delay sum. For tbench, they translate directly to
throughput. The other shoe lands with async CPU hog net-blasters, for
those, scheduler cycles tends to be wasted cycles.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-20 5:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 76+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-05 10:27 [RFC][PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: Complete EEVDF Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 01/10] sched/eevdf: Add feature comments Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 02/10] sched/eevdf: Remove min_vruntime_copy Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 03/10] sched/fair: Cleanup pick_task_fair() vs throttle Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 21:11 ` Benjamin Segall
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Cleanup pick_task_fair()s curr Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:27 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Unify pick_{,next_}_task_fair() Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 2:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/10] sched: Allow sched_class::dequeue_task() to fail Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/10] sched/fair: Re-organize dequeue_task_fair() Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Implement delayed dequeue Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 9:23 ` Chen Yu
2024-04-08 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-11 1:32 ` Yan-Jie Wang
2024-04-25 10:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-12 10:42 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-15 10:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-16 3:18 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-16 5:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-18 16:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-18 17:08 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-04-24 15:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-25 11:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 11:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 16:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-27 6:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-28 16:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-04-29 12:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-15 17:07 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-24 15:15 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-25 10:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-25 11:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 9:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-26 10:16 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-29 14:33 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-02 10:26 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-10 14:49 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-15 9:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-15 11:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-15 18:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-20 15:20 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-29 22:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-03 19:30 ` Luis Machado
2024-06-04 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-04 13:59 ` Hongyan Xia
2024-06-04 14:23 ` Luis Machado
2024-06-04 14:49 ` Hongyan Xia
2024-06-04 19:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-05 7:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-05 9:14 ` Luis Machado
2024-06-05 9:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-12 15:08 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-23 8:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-23 9:06 ` Luis Machado
2024-05-23 9:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-06-03 15:57 ` Hongyan Xia
2024-04-26 10:15 ` Luis Machado
2024-04-20 5:57 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2024-04-22 13:13 ` Tobias Huschle
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/10] sched/eevdf: Allow shorter slices to wakeup-preempt Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-05 10:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/10] sched/eevdf: Use sched_attr::sched_runtime to set request/slice suggestion Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-06 8:16 ` Hillf Danton
2024-05-07 5:34 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-15 10:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-05-07 15:15 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-08 13:52 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-09 3:48 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-09 5:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2024-05-13 4:07 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-05-14 9:18 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-14 15:23 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-05-14 16:15 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-22 14:48 ` Chen Yu
2024-05-27 10:11 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/10] sched/fair: Complete EEVDF K Prateek Nayak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6b2487403dafb09fbdfb0075123fc3fda8ab7636.camel@gmx.de \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).