Page 14 of 15 FirstFirst ... 412131415 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 146

Thread: The v2 Rotary Interactivity Favor Scheduler

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    642

    Default

    sure:

    http://pastebin.com/gaUv52Ue (valid 1 month)

  2. #132
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    sure:

    http://pastebin.com/gaUv52Ue (valid 1 month)
    CONFIG_NO_HZ=y

    Could you turn it off and re-compile the kernel ?
    Thanks.

    As I say
    The algorithm of RIFS-ES can be affected by variable clock interrupt.

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    642

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3766691 View Post
    CONFIG_NO_HZ=y

    Could you turn it off and re-compile the kernel ?
    Thanks.

    As I say
    The algorithm of RIFS-ES can be affected by variable clock interrupt.

    sure, will do

    I read that there isn't that much of more power consumption:

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=651&num=1


    where others claim 10-20% more consumption:

    http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-524694.html


    now raw performance and efficiency counts (in terms of workflow) so I'll revert to tickless or more energy-friendly settings in 1-2 weeks ^^

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    642

    Default

    well, that massively helped

    pulseaudio now continually seems to stay at 1% cpu load instead of pegging around 100-300%


    it could have been partly an issue caused by configuration but I believe it's partly also due to tickless:

    Quote Originally Posted by diff config-3.4-geek_rifs_v2 config-3.4-geek_RIFS_ES-no-tickless_less-debug
    3c3
    < # Linux/x86_64 3.4.2-geek Kernel Configuration
    ---
    > # Linux/x86_64 3.4.2-geek_btrfs+_libata_RIFS-ES-v1-low-spec Kernel Configuration
    113d112
    < CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ=y
    319c318
    < CONFIG_NO_HZ=y
    ---
    > # CONFIG_NO_HZ is not set
    326a326
    > CONFIG_SCHED_OMIT_FRAME_POINTER=y
    553d552
    < CONFIG_CPU_IDLE_GOV_MENU=y
    2113a2113
    > # CONFIG_NTP_PPS is not set
    3754,3755c3754
    < CONFIG_UNWIND_INFO=y
    < CONFIG_STACK_UNWIND=y
    ---
    > # CONFIG_UNWIND_INFO is not set
    3759c3758
    < CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE=y
    ---
    > # CONFIG_RCU_CPU_STALL_VERBOSE is not set

    it's still for 1-2 seconds stalling when it's heavily writing even though the dirty values are low as "1" - but that obviously might be caused by either luks/device-mapper or the filesystems and the other subsystems (VFS, writeback, etc.) involved


    last kernel that - in my opinion - had really great writeback performance was 2.6.34, dunno


    will stay on this kernel now ...


    thanks !
    Last edited by kernelOfTruth; 06-23-2012 at 06:38 AM.

  5. #135
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    sure, will do

    I read that there isn't that much of more power consumption:

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...item=651&num=1


    where others claim 10-20% more consumption:

    http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-524694.html


    now raw performance and efficiency counts (in terms of workflow) so I'll revert to tickless or more energy-friendly settings in 1-2 weeks ^^
    It seems that Tickless just help very little on power saving. On the other hand using tickless system can cause significantly high latency

  6. #136
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    well, that massively helped

    pulseaudio now continually seems to stay at 1% cpu load instead of pegging around 100-300%


    it could have been partly an issue caused by configuration but I believe it's partly also due to tickless:




    it's still for 1-2 seconds stalling when it's heavily writing even though the dirty values are low as "1" - but that obviously might be caused by either luks/device-mapper or the filesystems and the other subsystems (VFS, writeback, etc.) involved


    last kernel that - in my opinion - had really great writeback performance was 2.6.34, dunno
    How about the subjective feeling between RIFS and RIFS-ES-Low-Spec ?

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    642

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3766691 View Post
    How about the subjective feeling between RIFS and RIFS-ES-Low-Spec ?
    like I wrote - I need that box for production - so I won't compile another RIFS with NOHZ right now (next week or after that at earliest)


    otherwise it would be RIFS + tickless vs. RIFS-ES-low-spec + NOHZ

    and that wouldn't be fair


    in my opinion RIFS was more consistent but less fluid whereas RIFS-ES-low-spec was more smooth but at times also less smooth

    this could be a whole different story with tickless disabled

  8. #138
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    like I wrote - I need that box for production - so I won't compile another RIFS with NOHZ right now (next week or after that at earliest)


    otherwise it would be RIFS + tickless vs. RIFS-ES-low-spec + NOHZ

    and that wouldn't be fair


    in my opinion RIFS was more consistent but less fluid whereas RIFS-ES-low-spec was more smooth but at times also less smooth

    this could be a whole different story with tickless disabled
    NOHZ and tickless are the same things.

    Actually I can't feel difference between RIFS and -ES but with benchmark data -ES would gain more improvement

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vienna, Austria; Germany; hello world :)
    Posts
    642

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3766691 View Post
    NOHZ and tickless are the same things.

    Actually I can't feel difference between RIFS and -ES but with benchmark data -ES would gain more improvement
    ah yes - I actually meant # NOHZ is not set


    yeah, the differences are very subtle but under load RIFS-ES probably can really shine and show its strength



    RIFS/-ES needs more testers and experiences to further improve and become even better


    anyone ?



    edit:

    it's actually ridiculous how almost every app seemed to hog the cpu with NOHZ=y
    (between 50-100% per app)

    it might have been issues with the kernel over longer runtime - I'll see at the end of the time if it shows the same behavior or if it stays that calm with 0-1%
    Last edited by kernelOfTruth; 06-23-2012 at 06:56 AM.

  10. #140
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    GuangDong,China
    Posts
    141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kernelOfTruth View Post
    ah yes - I actually meant # NOHZ is not set


    yeah, the differences are very subtle but under load RIFS-ES probably can really shine and show its strength



    RIFS/-ES needs more testers and experiences to further improve and become even better
    Ah, yes
    Now the last things is we have to make it into modular.(Very last things) After this RIFS/-ES will support CGroups.
    RIFS/-ES have beaten BFS but now we have to promote it more. If Gentoo developer can help me to promote I will say a big THANKS.

    it might have been issues with the kernel over longer runtime - I'll see at the end of the time if it shows the same behavior or if it stays that calm with 0-1%
    I seldom run my computer for long time but now I will try. Do you play LOL?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •