From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2014 14:55:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140901125505.GK27892@worktop.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1409255196.4945.7.camel@j-VirtualBox>
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:46:36PM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-08-27 at 16:32 -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> > If there are multiple non-forced updates, option 1's error seems to
> > accumulate and non-bounded as we do not actually update?
> > Is this a concern?
>
> It should be fine. Once the delta is large enough, we will end up doing
> the update anyway.
Well, the thing is you can have nr_cpus * 12.5% of outstanding delta;
that might be a lot, esp on the large machines.
Now there's two problems with all this; the first is the relative
threshold, typically such per-cpu things have a fixed update threshold,
this makes it much easier to qualify the actual error.
Secondly the indeed the nr_cpus in the error bound. Some things; like
the proportion code scale the threshold by log2(nr_cpus) in an attempt
to do something sensible there.
But yes, unbounded errors here are a problem, sure relaxing the updates
makes things go fast, they also make things go skew.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-01 12:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-26 23:11 Jason Low
2014-08-26 23:24 ` Paul Turner
2014-08-27 17:34 ` Jason Low
2014-08-27 23:32 ` Tim Chen
2014-08-28 19:46 ` Jason Low
2014-09-01 12:55 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-09-02 7:41 ` Jason Low
2014-09-03 11:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-09-09 14:52 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load() tip-bot for Jason Low
2014-08-27 19:18 ` [PATCH RESULT] sched: Rewrite per entity runnable load average tracking v5 Yuyang Du
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=20140901125505.GK27892@worktop.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.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
Powered by JetHome