From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752787AbZIJQdr (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:33:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751173AbZIJQdq (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:33:46 -0400 Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.25]:29351 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751146AbZIJQdp (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:33:45 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=GdJmkbJq4LK1r8zM1ZgmWozvm5f9BdQD/Imx73oDVw1cMfGEH97WcMzoylbRYN8/4c A42ZRdETjbxJD/SayMA546eTWo9z1YIfgb3BCejLlKLWnLx3FuLC2GQjWoJudYrBgFSv UVaS6Xs2doVGjVYYnRxXzS3aHy62IbwswAnDM= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090910162611.GA31265@elte.hu> References: <1252486344.28645.18.camel@marge.simson.net> <20090909115429.GY18599@kernel.dk> <20090909122006.GA18599@kernel.dk> <20090909180404.GA11027@elte.hu> <4AA80C1E.2080901@arcor.de> <20090910060824.GF1335@elte.hu> <1252598709.7360.0.camel@twins> <20090910162611.GA31265@elte.hu> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:33:37 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: BFS vs. mainline scheduler benchmarks and measurements From: Bret Towe To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Nikos Chantziaras , Jens Axboe , Mike Galbraith , Con Kolivas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:26 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Bret Towe wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:05 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 09:02 -0700, Bret Towe wrote: >> >> >> >> thanks to this thread and others I've seen several kernel tunables >> >> that can effect how the scheduler performs/acts >> >> but what I don't see after a bit of looking is where all these are >> >> documented >> >> perhaps thats also part of the reason there are unhappy people with >> >> the current code in the kernel just because they don't know how >> >> to tune it for their workload >> > >> > The thing is, ideally they should not need to poke at these. >> > These knobs are under CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG, and that is exactly >> > what they are for. >> >> even then I would think they should be documented so people can >> find out what item is hurting their workload so they can better >> report the bug no? > > Would be happy to apply such documentation patches. You could also > help start adding a 'scheduler performance' wiki portion to > perf.wiki.kernel.org, if you have time for that. time isn't so much the issue but not having any clue as to what any of the options do