Re: [PATCH -mm v8 0/7] idle memory tracking

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 01:47:15PM -0700, Andres Lagar-Cavilla wrote:
> I think the remaining question here is performance.
> 
> Have you conducted any studies where
> - there is a workload
> - a daemon is poking kpageidle every N seconds/minutes
> - what is the daemon cpu consumption?
> - what is the workload degradation if any?
> 
> N candidates include 30 seconds, 1 minute, 2 minutes, 5 minutes....
> 
> Workload candidates include TPC, spec int memory intensive things like
> 429.mcf, stream (http://www.cs.virginia.edu/stream/ "sustainable
> memory bandwidth" vs floating point performance)
> 
> I'm not asking for a research paper, but if, say, a 2 minute-period
> daemon introduces no degradation and adds up to a minute of cpu per
> hour, then we're golden.

Fair enough. Will do that soon and report back.

Thanks a lot for the review, it was really helpful!

Vladimir
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux