-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
Latency_nice proposal for use in TT #8
Comments
Hi @smarkusg @hamadmarri, If my understanding about the patch is correct, what that patch seems to do is:
I remember those still open issues in CacULE with regards to IDLE/wakeup in
@hamadmarri, What do you think? |
Hi @smarkusg Thank you so much for your experiments. I am reading Part Shah's patch. I will check if we can integrate the patch with TT as @raykzhao showed. Regarding the benchmarks in (https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2111136-IB-SCHEDULER42&export=pdf), I am seeing TT performs poorly in those tests. Are there any differences in kernel configs or patches? Thank you so much for the proposal. |
I am having a difficulty to find the full patch from https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/7/575 Sorry about that |
Please check this patch I am running it right now. It is more likely similar to hz_periodic even though I have nohz_full set, I got very similar ticks numbers
And the fan is crying with 1666Hz Please let me know if any performance gain in your tests, I will run some test soon Thank you |
Notice that realtime tasks can be assigned to all cpus since the boot up. There must be a fine way to decay |
R2: Every 19ms, the
|
Here is the latency patch the original one
|
Hi @hamadmarri Benchamark for TT marked as git20211 for kernel 5.15 came from Xanmod repository. edge -> tt
Kernel marked as 5.13.19*tt was compiled like rest of my 5.13 kernels - same LTO=full clang "CONFIG_HZ_803=y" configuration and simple settings like for Baby-CPU-Scheduler. As I find a moment I will reinstall the current tt 5.15 release for xanmod from the site and compare in a simple benchmark. I will also check the patch for nr_lat_sensitive and let you know too. Thanks again for your work. |
Hi @everyone, Any testing updates/findings about Thank you |
Good morning
First of all, I want to apologize for my English
Additionally, I want to thank you for your hard work on Linux Scheduler and more
especially for BABY-CPU-SCHEDULE, thanks to which I am constantly learning
various algorithms.
I was forced to do so by the COVID-19 pandemic to bring in my 10-year-old
son's laptop for remote work.
I am not a programmer and I also want to mention it at the outset.
Back to the point
I am currently checking my stock kernel 5.13 with your Cachy Scheduler
v5.9-Idle with additional patches some solution.Parth Shah latency_nice series of patches
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/7/575
Unfortunately I don't have benchmarks but implemented it alongside
MLFQ for the classification of latency_nice tasks. After a few modifications, the kernel
classifies
only user processes with no children, leaving the system alone. As
for me the usability experience for normal system operation is very much
promising.
If you are able and have time to experiment, you can take a look at
series of patches
Patha Shah. Maybe the idea will be useful for the development of TT?
Currently I'm not going to switch to kernel> 5.13, I don't
I don't know why, but for me it works weird on the desktop (subjectively
feeling).
I did a general test of my kernels with a backport to 5.13 of your solutions, but
as you know, what's good for desktops doesn't always equal performance.
Mine is cachyb2. I know compiling Clang 13 with LTO is always faster than GCC
even with the GCC LTO, but the overall picture shows that 5.14 and 5.15 after the changes
weirdly poorly with the SCHED_CORE changes.
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2111136-IB-SCHEDULER42&export=pdf
Same kernel settings as for BABY-CPU: CONFIG_HZ_803 and https://github.com/hamadmarri/cacule-cpu-scheduler/blob/master/scripts/apply_suggested_configs.sh
I can reveal a binary version of my kernel.
I'm ashamed of my code.
I don't want to publish this to you at the moment.
Thank you for your interest
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: