diff options
author | Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com> | 2011-04-14 10:30:53 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> | 2011-04-19 10:08:38 +0200 |
commit | 2f36825b176f67e5c5228aa33d828bc39718811f (patch) | |
tree | 065130f8eb74a419d8ddf1856ccc64ee7b195843 /sound/usb/6fire | |
parent | 69c80f3e9d3c569f8a3cee94ba1a324b5a7fa6b9 (diff) |
sched: Next buddy hint on sleep and preempt path
When a task in a taskgroup sleeps, pick_next_task starts all the way back at
the root and picks the task/taskgroup with the min vruntime across all
runnable tasks.
But when there are many frequently sleeping tasks across different taskgroups,
it makes better sense to stay with same taskgroup for its slice period (or
until all tasks in the taskgroup sleeps) instead of switching cross taskgroup
on each sleep after a short runtime.
This helps specifically where taskgroups corresponds to a process with
multiple threads. The change reduces the number of CR3 switches in this case.
Example:
Two taskgroups with 2 threads each which are running for 2ms and
sleeping for 1ms. Looking at sched:sched_switch shows:
BEFORE: taskgroup_1 threads [5004, 5005], taskgroup_2 threads [5016, 5017]
cpu-soaker-5004 [003] 3683.391089
cpu-soaker-5016 [003] 3683.393106
cpu-soaker-5005 [003] 3683.395119
cpu-soaker-5017 [003] 3683.397130
cpu-soaker-5004 [003] 3683.399143
cpu-soaker-5016 [003] 3683.401155
cpu-soaker-5005 [003] 3683.403168
cpu-soaker-5017 [003] 3683.405170
AFTER: taskgroup_1 threads [21890, 21891], taskgroup_2 threads [21934, 21935]
cpu-soaker-21890 [003] 865.895494
cpu-soaker-21935 [003] 865.897506
cpu-soaker-21934 [003] 865.899520
cpu-soaker-21935 [003] 865.901532
cpu-soaker-21934 [003] 865.903543
cpu-soaker-21935 [003] 865.905546
cpu-soaker-21891 [003] 865.907548
cpu-soaker-21890 [003] 865.909560
cpu-soaker-21891 [003] 865.911571
cpu-soaker-21890 [003] 865.913582
cpu-soaker-21891 [003] 865.915594
cpu-soaker-21934 [003] 865.917606
Similar problem is there when there are multiple taskgroups and say a task A
preempts currently running task B of taskgroup_1. On schedule, pick_next_task
can pick an unrelated task on taskgroup_2. Here it would be better to give some
preference to task B on pick_next_task.
A simple (may be extreme case) benchmark I tried was tbench with 2 tbench
client processes with 2 threads each running on a single CPU. Avg throughput
across 5 50 sec runs was:
BEFORE: 105.84 MB/sec
AFTER: 112.42 MB/sec
Signed-off-by: Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1302802253-25760-1-git-send-email-venki@google.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Diffstat (limited to 'sound/usb/6fire')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions