From: Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.com, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com,
Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Amit K. Arora" <aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Scaled statistics using APERF/MPERF in x86
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 23:56:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080527182604.GK5181@dirshya.in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080527094035.67ccda32@infradead.org>
* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> [2008-05-27 09:40:35]:
> On Tue, 27 May 2008 19:34:40 +0530
> Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > What we are proposing is a scaled time value that is scaled to the
> > current CPU capacity. If the scaled utilisation is 50% when the CPU
> > is at 100% capacity, it is expected to remain at 50% even if the CPU's
> > capacity is dropped to 50%, while the traditional utilisation value
> > will be 100%.
>
> When you use the word "capacity" I cringe ;(
>
> >
> > The problem in the above two cases is that we had assumed that the
> > maximum CPU capacity is 100% at normal capacity (without IDA).
> >
> > If the CPU is at half the maximum frequency, then scaled stats should
> > show 50%.
>
> see frequency != capacity.
> It's about more than frequency. It's about how much cache you have
> available too. If you run single threaded on a dual core cpu, you have
> 100% of the cache, but the cpu is 50% idle. But that doesn't mean that
> when you double the load, you actually get 2x the performance. So
> you're not at 50% of capacity!
You are right.... I kind of interchangeably used frequency and
capacity assuming capacity is linearly proportional to frequency!
In reality, I agree that capacity is not linearly proportional to
frequency and it is dependent on cache usage etc.
The differences apart, I am sure I have conveyed the relationship
between scaled stats and CPU frequency. I used the term 'capacity' to
generalise CPU performance, but I guess it may lead to a different
discussion. I will stick to frequency. :)
--Vaidy
> > The point I am trying to make is whether scaling should be done
> > relative to CPUs designed maximum capacity or maximum capacity under
> > current constraints is to be discussed.
>
> now you're back at "capacity".. we were at frequency before ;(
>
>
> >
> > Case A:
> > ------
> >
> > Scaled stats is stats relative to maximum designed capacity including
> > IDA
>
> you don't know what that is though.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-27 18:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-26 14:31 Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 14:31 ` [RFC PATCH v1 1/3] General framework for APERF/MPERF access and accounting Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 18:11 ` Balbir Singh
2008-05-27 14:54 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 14:31 ` [RFC PATCH v1 2/3] Make calls to account_scaled_stats Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 18:18 ` Balbir Singh
2008-05-27 15:02 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-29 15:18 ` Michael Neuling
2008-05-29 18:23 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 14:31 ` [RFC PATCH v1 3/3] Print scaled utime and stime in getdelays Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-26 15:50 ` [RFC PATCH v1 0/3] Scaled statistics using APERF/MPERF in x86 Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-26 17:24 ` Balbir Singh
2008-05-26 18:00 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-26 18:36 ` Balbir Singh
2008-05-26 18:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-27 12:59 ` Balbir Singh
2008-05-27 13:19 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-27 14:15 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-27 15:27 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-31 21:27 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-02 17:54 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-06-03 2:20 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-27 13:29 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-27 14:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-27 15:20 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-27 14:04 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan
2008-05-27 16:40 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-05-27 18:26 ` Vaidyanathan Srinivasan [this message]
2008-05-31 21:17 ` Pavel Machek
2008-05-31 21:13 ` Pavel Machek
2008-06-02 6:08 ` Balbir Singh
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=20080527182604.GK5181@dirshya.in.ibm.com \
--to=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=aarora@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.org \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=venkatesh.pallipadi@intel.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®