1. 19 Apr, 2011 2 commits
    • Venkatesh Pallipadi's avatar
      sched: Next buddy hint on sleep and preempt path · 2f36825b
      Venkatesh Pallipadi authored
      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: default avatarVenkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
      Acked-by: default avatarRik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1302802253-25760-1-git-send-email-venki@google.comSigned-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      2f36825b
    • Venkatesh Pallipadi's avatar
      sched: Make set_*_buddy() work on non-task entities · 69c80f3e
      Venkatesh Pallipadi authored
      Make set_*_buddy() work on non-task sched_entity, to facilitate the
      use of next_buddy to cache a group entity in cases where one of the
      tasks within that entity sleeps or gets preempted.
      
      set_skip_buddy() was incorrectly comparing the policy of task that is
      yielding to be not equal to SCHED_IDLE. Yielding should happen even
      when task yielding is SCHED_IDLE. This change removes the policy check
      on the yielding task.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarVenkatesh Pallipadi <venki@google.com>
      Signed-off-by: default avatarPeter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
      Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1302744070-30079-2-git-send-email-venki@google.comSigned-off-by: default avatarIngo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      69c80f3e
  2. 18 Apr, 2011 1 commit
  3. 14 Apr, 2011 23 commits
  4. 13 Apr, 2011 14 commits