Re: [patch 00/17] CFS Bandwidth Control v7.1

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> Well, the most recent run Hu Tao sent (with lockdep disabled) are 
> different:
> 
>  table 2. shows the differences between patch and no-patch. quota is set
>           to a large value to avoid processes being throttled.
> 
>         quota/period          cycles                   instructions             branches
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> base                          1,146,384,132           1,151,216,688            212,431,532
> patch   cgroup disabled       1,163,717,547 (1.51%)   1,165,238,015 ( 1.22%)   215,092,327 ( 1.25%)
> patch   10000000000/1000      1,244,889,136 (8.59%)   1,299,128,502 (12.85%)   243,162,542 (14.47%)
> patch   10000000000/10000     1,253,305,706 (9.33%)   1,299,167,897 (12.85%)   243,175,027 (14.47%)
> patch   10000000000/100000    1,252,374,134 (9.25%)   1,299,314,357 (12.86%)   243,203,923 (14.49%)
> patch   10000000000/1000000   1,254,165,824 (9.40%)   1,299,751,347 (12.90%)   243,288,600 (14.53%)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> The +1.5% increase in vanilla kernel context switching performance is 
> unfortunate - where does that overhead come from?
> 
> The +9% increase in cgroups context-switching overhead looks rather 
> brutal.

As to those, do they run pipe-test in a cgroup or are you always using
the root cgroup?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/