Re: [PATCH 00/15] sched: EEVDF and latency-nice and/or slice-attr

[Peter Zijlstra]

Sorry, I seem to have forgotten to reply to this part...

On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 07:51:03PM -0500, Youssef Esmat wrote:

> I think looking at the sched latency numbers alone does not show the
> complete picture. I ran the same input latency test again and tried to
> capture some of these numbers for the chrome processes.
> 
> EEVDF 1.5ms slice:
> 
> Input latency test result: 226ms
> perf sched latency:
> switches: 1,084,694
> avg:   1.139 ms
> max: 408.397 ms
> 
> EEVDF 6.0ms slice:
> 
> Input latency test result: 178ms
> perf sched latency:
> switches: 892,306
> avg:   1.145 ms
> max: 354.344 ms

> For our scenario, it is very expensive to interrupt UI threads. It
> will increase the input latency significantly. Lowering the scheduling
> latency at the cost of switching out important threads can be very
> detrimental in this workload. UI and input threads run with a nice
> value of -8.

> That said, this might not be beneficial for all workloads, and we are
> still trying our other workloads out.

Right, this seems to suggest something on your critical path (you should
trace that) has more than 3ms of compute in a single activation. 

Basically this means chrome is fairly fat on this critical path. But it
seems you know about that.

Anyway, once you know the 95% length of the longest activation on your
critical path, you can indeed set your slice to that. This should be
readily available from trace data.