ee122077b0
When a foreign event loop that does not enter an alertable wait state is running (which is also the case when a native dialog window is modal), pipe handlers would freeze temporarily due to their APC callbacks not being invoked. We address this problem by moving the I/O callbacks to the Windows thread pool, and only posting completion events to the main loop from there. That makes the actual I/O completely independent from any main loop, while the signal delivery works also with foreign loops (because Qt event delivery uses Windows messages, which foreign loops typically handle correctly). As a nice side effect, performance (and in particular scalability) is improved. Several other approaches have been tried: 1) Using QWinEventNotifier was about a quarter slower and scaled much worse. Additionally, it also required a rather egregious hack to handle the (pathological) case of a single thread talking to both ends of a QLocalSocket synchronously. 2) Queuing APCs from the thread pool to the main thread and also posting wake-up events to its event loop, and handling I/O on the main thread; this performed roughly like this solution , but scaled half as well, and the separate wake-up path was still deemed hacky. 3) Only posting wake-up events to the main thread from the thread pool, and still handling I/O on the main thread; this still performed comparably to 2), and the pathological case was not handled at all. 4) Using this approach for reads and that of 3) for writes was slightly faster with big amounts of data, but scaled slightly worse, and the diverging implementations were deemed not desirable. Fixes: QTBUG-64443 Change-Id: I1cd87c07db39f3b46a2683ce236d7eb67b5be549 Reviewed-by: Oswald Buddenhagen <oswald.buddenhagen@gmx.de> |
||
---|---|---|
.. | ||
corelib | ||
dbus | ||
gui | ||
network | ||
plugins/imageformats/jpeg | ||
sql | ||
testlib | ||
widgets | ||
benchmarks.pro | ||
CMakeLists.txt | ||
README | ||
trusted-benchmarks.pri |
The most reliable way of running benchmarks is to do it in an otherwise idle system. On a busy system, the results will vary according to the other tasks demanding attention in the system. We have managed to obtain quite reliable results by doing the following on Linux (and you need root): - switching the scheduler to a Real-Time mode - setting the processor affinity to one single processor - disabling the other thread of the same core This should work rather well for CPU-intensive tasks. A task that is in Real- Time mode will simply not be preempted by the OS. But if you make OS syscalls, especially I/O ones, your task will be de-scheduled. Note that this includes page faults, so if you can, make sure your benchmark's warmup code paths touch most of the data. To do this you need a tool called schedtool (package schedtool), from http://freequaos.host.sk/schedtool/ From this point on, we are using CPU0 for all tasks: If you have a Hyperthreaded multi-core processor (Core-i5 and Core-i7), you have to disable the other thread of the same core as CPU0. To discover which one it is: $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/topology/thread_siblings_list This will print something like 0,4, meaning that CPUs 0 and 4 are sibling threads on the same core. So we'll turn CPU 4 off: (as root) # echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/online To turn it back on, echo 1 into the same file. To run a task on CPU 0 exclusively, using FIFO RT priority 10, you run the following: (as root) # schedtool -F -p 10 -a 1 -e ./taskname For example: # schedtool -F -p 10 -a 1 -e ./tst_bench_qstring -tickcounter Warning: if your task livelocks or takes far too long to complete, your system may be unusable for a long time, especially if you don't have other cores to run stuff on. To prevent that, run it before schedtool and time it. You can also limit the CPU time that the task is allowed to take. Run in the same shell as you'll run schedtool: $ ulimit -s 300 To limit to 300 seconds (5 minutes) If your task runs away, it will get a SIGXCPU after consuming 5 minutes of CPU time (5 minutes running at 100%). If your app is multithreaded, you may want to give it more CPUs, like CPU0 and CPU1 with -a 3 (it's a bitmask). For best results, you should disable ALL other cores and threads of the same processor. The new Core-i7 have one processor with 4 cores, each core can run 2 threads; the older Mac Pros have two processors with 4 cores each. So on those Mac Pros, you'd disable cores 1, 2 and 3, while on the Core-i7, you'll need to disable all other CPUs. However, disabling just the sibling thread seems to produce very reliable results for me already, with variance often below 0.5% (even though there are some measurable spikes). Other things to try: Running the benchmark with highest priority, i.e. "sudo nice -19" usually produces stable results on some machines. If the benchmark also involves displaying something on the screen (on X11), running it with "-sync" is a must. Though, in that case the "real" cost is not correct, but it is useful to discover regressions. Also; not many people know about ionice (1) ionice - get/set program io scheduling class and priority