From: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
juri.lelli@redhat.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, mgorman@suse.de,
bristot@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, qyousef@layalina.io,
chris.hyser@oracle.com, patrick.bellasi@matbug.net,
pjt@google.com, pavel@ucw.cz, qperret@google.com,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, joshdon@google.com, timj@gnu.org,
kprateek.nayak@amd.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com,
youssefesmat@chromium.org, joel@joelfernandes.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] sched: EEVDF using latency-nice
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 11:27:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKfTPtA9DYJ5=VYGpS_XBzzmvgJeYcmmG261A1cby_sT7kHdYg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230306132521.968182689@infradead.org>
On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 at 15:17, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Ever since looking at the latency-nice patches, I've wondered if EEVDF would
> not make more sense, and I did point Vincent at some older patches I had for
> that (which is here his augmented rbtree thing comes from).
>
> Also, since I really dislike the dual tree, I also figured we could dynamically
> switch between an augmented tree and not (and while I have code for that,
> that's not included in this posting because with the current results I don't
> think we actually need this).
>
> Anyway, since I'm somewhat under the weather, I spend last week desperately
> trying to connect a small cluster of neurons in defiance of the snot overlord
> and bring back the EEVDF patches from the dark crypts where they'd been
> gathering cobwebs for the past 13 odd years.
I haven't studied your patchset in detail yet but at a 1st glance this
seems to be a major rework on the cfs task placement and the latency
is just an add-on on top of moving to the EEVDF scheduling.
>
> By friday they worked well enough, and this morning (because obviously I forgot
> the weekend is ideal to run benchmarks) I ran a bunch of hackbenck, netperf,
> tbench and sysbench -- there's a bunch of wins and losses, but nothing that
> indicates a total fail.
>
> ( in fact, some of the schbench results seem to indicate EEVDF schedules a lot
> more consistent than CFS and has a bunch of latency wins )
>
> ( hackbench also doesn't show the augmented tree and generally more expensive
> pick to be a loss, in fact it shows a slight win here )
>
>
> hackbech load + cyclictest --policy other results:
>
>
> EEVDF CFS
>
> # Min Latencies: 00053
> LNICE(19) # Avg Latencies: 04350
> # Max Latencies: 76019
>
> # Min Latencies: 00052 00053
> LNICE(0) # Avg Latencies: 00690 00687
> # Max Latencies: 14145 13913
>
> # Min Latencies: 00019
> LNICE(-19) # Avg Latencies: 00261
> # Max Latencies: 05642
>
>
> The nice -19 numbers aren't as pretty as Vincent's, but at the end I was going
> cross-eyed from staring at tree prints and I just couldn't figure out where it
> was going side-ways.
>
> There's definitely more benchmarking/tweaking to be done (0-day already
> reported a stress-ng loss), but if we can pull this off we can delete a whole
> much of icky heuristics code. EEVDF is a much better defined policy than what
> we currently have.
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-07 10:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-06 13:25 [PATCH 00/10] sched: EEVDF using latency-nice Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 01/10] sched: Introduce latency-nice as a per-task attribute Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 02/10] sched/core: Propagate parent tasks latency requirements to the child task Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 03/10] sched: Allow sched_{get,set}attr to change latency_nice of the task Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 04/10] sched/fair: Add latency_offset Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 05/10] sched/fair: Add sched group latency support Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 06/10] sched/fair: Add avg_vruntime Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-21 13:58 ` Chen Yu
2023-03-21 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-24 7:12 ` Chen Yu
2023-03-24 10:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 07/10] sched/fair: Remove START_DEBIT Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 08/10] sched/fair: Add lag based placement Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-16 22:49 ` Tim Chen
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 09/10] rbtree: Add rb_add_augmented_cached() helper Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-06 13:25 ` [PATCH 10/10] sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF like policy Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-08 8:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-08 9:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-08 13:36 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 4:23 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-10 20:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-11 5:53 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-11 7:56 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 12:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 15:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 15:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-09 16:24 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-03-09 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-07 10:27 ` Vincent Guittot [this message]
2023-03-07 13:08 ` [PATCH 00/10] sched: EEVDF using latency-nice Peter Zijlstra
2023-03-08 15:13 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2023-03-22 6:49 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-03-22 9:38 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-03-23 11:53 ` Pavel Machek
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='CAKfTPtA9DYJ5=VYGpS_XBzzmvgJeYcmmG261A1cby_sT7kHdYg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=bristot@redhat.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chris.hyser@oracle.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=joshdon@google.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=patrick.bellasi@matbug.net \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=qperret@google.com \
--cc=qyousef@layalina.io \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=timj@gnu.org \
--cc=youssefesmat@chromium.org \
--cc=yu.c.chen@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).