Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix concurrency on non-cgroups linux #4792

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

sxa
Copy link
Member

@sxa sxa commented Sep 28, 2023

There appears to be a bug in the logic when detecting the amount of RAM available on a Linux machine which does not have cgroups enabled.

In this case, the amount of RAM is coming back in GB instead of MB so ends up looking very small when the concurrency calculation is performed. This should resolve it, however it needs to be checked on more machines since I found that /sys/fs/cgroup/memory/memory.limit_in_bytes on one of out Linux/ppc64le machines (test-osuosl-ubuntu1604-ppc64le-2) was 9223372036854710272 which doesn't seem right.

Fixing this has the potential to dramatically decrease the openjdk test job times on some Linux machines (Spotted on RISC-V)

sxa added 6 commits September 27, 2023 15:25
Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
…roblem ...

Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stewart X Addison <sxa@redhat.com>
@sxa sxa self-assigned this Sep 28, 2023
@sxa
Copy link
Member Author

sxa commented Sep 29, 2023

This change (resulting in concurrency:2 improves the execution time on the RISC-V systems it was spotted on by around a third for sanity.openjdk. Increasing it to 3 provides a slight improvement (In the ballpark of around 10%) but does result in a CPU load in excess of the number of cores for most of the execution so I would not necessarily advocate increasing it further, at least for systems with 4 cores.

@sxa
Copy link
Member Author

sxa commented Feb 14, 2024

Superceded by other PRs - most recently #5063 - so closing.

@sxa sxa closed this Feb 14, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant