From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
Cc: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: hackbench [pthread mode] regression with 2.6.29-rc3
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:17:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1233479836.4787.63.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1233476961.13659.12.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com>
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 16:29 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> > Bisect located below patch.
> > commit 490dea45d00f01847ebebd007685d564aaf2cd98
> > Author: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Date: Mon Nov 24 17:06:57 2008 +0100
> >
> > itimers: remove the per-cpu-ish-ness
> >
> > Either we bounce once cacheline per cpu per tick, yielding n^2 bounces
> > or we just bounce a single..
> >
> > Also, using per-cpu allocations for the thread-groups complicates the
> > per-cpu allocator in that its currently aimed to be a fixed sized
> > allocator and the only possible extention to that would be vmap based,
> > which is seriously constrained on 32 bit archs.
> >
> >
> > After above patch is reverted, hackbench result is restored.
>
> oltp has ~3% regression with 2.6.29-rc3 on 4core*2p stokley machine.
> After above patch reverted, the regression disappeared.
*sigh*, did they gain anything with introduction of the per-cpu crap?
f06febc96ba8e0af80bcc3eaec0a109e88275fac
5ce73a4a5a4893a1aa4cdeed1b1a5a6de42c43b6
bb34d92f643086d546b49cef680f6f305ed84414
ad133ba3dc283300e5b62b5b7211d2f39fbf6ee7
ce394471d13bf071939a9a0b48c64c297676d233
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-01 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-01 7:30 hackbench [pthread mode] regression with 2.6.29-rc3 Zhang, Yanmin
[not found] ` <d3f22a0902010026q1db36381j36cb1c9803d48431@mail.gmail.com>
2009-02-01 8:29 ` Lin Ming
2009-02-01 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-02-01 9:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-01 10:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-02-02 1:12 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-02-02 8:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-02 17:49 ` Bryon Roche
2009-02-02 20:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-03 11:56 ` [RFC] process wide itimer cruft Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-03 17:23 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-02-03 17:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-02-03 18:22 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1233479836.4787.63.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.