From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 2 20:36:48 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BC4A186 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 20:36:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@eitanadler.com) Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D2CD8FC08 for ; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 20:36:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id fw7so5511265vcb.13 for ; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:36:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eitanadler.com; s=0xdeadbeef; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=l+EE2tqyhlNFp4ljpPh3BQPWUob60yk2Wh/e0WOLVpg=; b=shBEi2j4ILI26hZXtOP4vCm+HZznYDv24pkjK/ogES3Z9/PxF/JcG0pVQ2MY2bCXa8 Cw25pllRBpfanSlcL35aX3MMukud+lJ5TZRdFYDZWEnkSzLY2Dy+nI0kw9rCI0n/Fq7L N3z1i7a+54aWgkBzhffOvZDNQ8ILKX3vbgJs8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=l+EE2tqyhlNFp4ljpPh3BQPWUob60yk2Wh/e0WOLVpg=; b=Ev3jaFt+RdnMrfsYNL0Tl/sMljiZV5DsF1TOMhFyM4Ka7eH7GvlcPrzhFU/sToB8pa CN4c45vU0K5Vcal8dEY9qTjtRWUBwoo+Hn0Vn1nMm9JmLe1lBN9xELqn0F/ndA5tCtkK gvgmc9rkFFTl1eZc0dlFgzHbgfTqp/NFQLfmjrSoXjsDuMnABRUilY+WvKvM2d91vXEA fK13iRLqmbCw5cBOf3AS3g+UjlpmuGdXoyeJz37vCHHNlMYvwwpwcYqpDQh9d0iKHRnU NMxb6AnS4E9Ztc3jodKsJnYAsRGP5tKO/EMDgokxszctpJS30rKce4y5HjJ3cTHZlX08 jEaQ== Received: by 10.52.32.1 with SMTP id e1mr2588101vdi.68.1351888607159; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 13:36:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.58.206 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:36:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Eitan Adler Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 16:36:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ULE patch, call for testers To: Jeff Roberson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlUwVw483KA6EqW7SfaOOlaRmqzUZEvcmNsUUVVjmX+oJuzrGBWGIIr/X3I42mafc1e7Icr Cc: current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2012 20:36:48 -0000 On 2 November 2012 14:26, Jeff Roberson wrote: > I have a small patch to the ULE scheduler that makes a fairly large change > to the way timeshare threads are handled. > > http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/schedslice.diff > > Previously ULE used a fixed slice size for all timeshare threads. Now it > scales the slice size down based on load. This should reduce latency for > timeshare threads as load increases. It is important to note that this does > not impact interactive threads. But when a thread transitions to > interactive from timeshare it should see some improvement. This happens > when something like Xorg chews up a lot of CPU. > > If anyone has perf tests they'd like to run please report back. I have done > a handful of validation. does it make sense to make these sysctls? +#define SCHED_SLICE_DEFAULT_DIVISOR 10 /* 100 ms. */ +#define SCHED_SLICE_MIN_DIVISOR 4 /* DEFAULT/MIN = 25 ms. */ -- Eitan Adler