Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Nikhil Rao
Date: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 - 9:21 am

On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Alex,Shi <alex.shi@intel.com> wrote:

I'm not very familiar with the Volanomark benchmark, but from the
patch you posted it looks like resetting the idle throttle (i.e.
making newidle balance more likely) hurts this benchmark. This is also
evident in the sharp increase in ctx rate in 2.6.37-rc1. Resetting
throttling was a heuristic added to induce more frequent idle
balancing after a migration, and it isn't strictly required to make
the other parts of that patch work. In your patch above, can you
please also remove the comment and idle_stamp reset.



The benchmark was pretty simple; run nr_cpu while-1 loops, one of them
niced to -15. I also experimented with some payloads with random
sleep/wakeup times, but nothing with high frequency balancing. I think
removing the reset should be OK for the idle test cases.

-Thanks,
Nikhil
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Alex,Shi, (Tue Nov 16, 2:34 am)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Rakib Mullick, (Tue Nov 16, 7:38 am)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Mike Galbraith, (Tue Nov 16, 8:26 am)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Nikhil Rao, (Tue Nov 16, 9:21 am)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Mike Galbraith, (Tue Nov 16, 10:32 am)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Nikhil Rao, (Tue Nov 16, 12:27 pm)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Peter Zijlstra, (Tue Nov 16, 12:37 pm)
Re: [performance bug] volanomark regression on 37-rc1, Nikhil Rao, (Wed Nov 17, 12:45 pm)
[tip:sched/urgent] sched: Fix volanomark performance regre ..., tip-bot for Alex Shi, (Thu Nov 18, 7:08 am)