Messages in this thread |  | | From | Aubrey Li <> | Date | Tue, 25 Feb 2020 21:41:28 +0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v4 00/19] Core scheduling v4 |
| |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 7:22 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 06:40:02PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 3:34 PM Aaron Lu <aaron.lwe@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 01:32:35PM +0800, Aubrey Li wrote: > > > > Aaron - did you test this before? In other words, if you reset repo to your > > > > last commit: > > > > > > I did this test only recently when I started to think if I can use > > > coresched to boost main workload's performance in a colocated > > > environment. > > > > > > > > > > > - 5bd3c80 sched/fair : Wake up forced idle siblings if needed > > > > > > > > Does the problem remain? Just want to check if this is a regression > > > > introduced by the subsequent patchset. > > > > > > The problem isn't there with commit 5bd3c80 as the head, so yes, it > > > looks like indeed a regression introduced by subsequent patchset. > > > > > > P.S. I will need to take a closer look if each cgA's task is running > > > on a different core later but the cpu usage of cgA is back to 800% with > > > commit 5bd3c80. > > > > Hmm..., I went through the subsequent patches, and I think this one > > > > - 4041eeb8f3 sched/fair: don't migrate task if cookie not match > > > > is probably the major cause, can you please revert this one to see > > if the problem is gone? > > Yes, reverting this one fixed the problem.
okay, but this patch also contributed the improvement of a few benchmarks on my side. So we need a way to fix your case, my quick thought is allowing task migration in this case(sounds like a workaround). Need take a deep look at CPU resource controlled code path when core scheduling enabled.
Any ideas?
Thanks, -Aubrey
|  |