On 06/17/2013 08:20 PM, Paul Turner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Alex Shi <alex....@intel.com> wrote:
>> > blocked_load_avg sometime is too heavy and far bigger than runnable load
>> > avg, that make balance make wrong decision. So remove it.
> Ok so this is going to have terrible effects on the correctness of
> shares distribution; I'm fairly opposed to it in its present form.
>
> So let's see, what could be happening..
>
> In "sched: compute runnable load avg in cpu_load and
> cpu_avg_load_per_task" you already update the load average weights
> solely based on current runnable load. While this is generally poor
> for stability (and I suspect the benefit is coming largely from
> weighted_cpuload() where you do want to use runnable_load_avg and not
> get_rq_runnable_load() where I suspect including blocked_load_avg() is
> correct in the longer term).
If the 'poor stability' means your previous example of 2 40% busy task
and one 90% busy task. It occasionally happens. but at least in all
testing, kbuild, aim7, tbench, oltp, hackbench, ltp etc. involve
blocked_load_avg is just worse, guess due to above reason.
>
> Ah so.. I have an inkling:
> Inside weighted_cpuload() where you're trying to use only
> runnable_load_avg; this is in-fact still including blocked_load_avg
> for a cgroup since in the cgroup case a group entities' contribution
> is a function of both runnable and blocked load.
with this patch tg will not include blocked_load_avg.
Honestly, blocked_load_avg should has its meaning, like in your
scenario. but just now, we only can see it bring more harm without any
help on all we tested benchmarks.
I can't find a reason to enable sth that hurt performance.
>
> Having weighted_cpuload() pull rq->load (possibly moderated by
> rq->avg) would reasonably avoid this since issued shares are
> calculated using instantaneous weights, without breaking the actual
> model for how much load overall that we believe the group has.
>
I considered to use rq->avg in weighted_cpuload, but when we do
move_tasks to balance load between cpu, we just consider the cfs tasks
not rt task, consider rq->load/avg will involved a unnecessary rt
interference. So I changed to cfs load only.
--
Thanks
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
