All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
To: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
	Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 2014 21:18:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1407471532.8365.18.camel@j-VirtualBox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140807180239.GC2480@intel.com>

On Fri, 2014-08-08 at 02:02 +0800, Yuyang Du wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 11:21:35AM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> > I ran these tests with most of the AIM7 workloads to compare its
> > performance between a 3.16 kernel and the kernel with these patches
> > applied.
> > 
> > The table below contains the percent difference between the baseline
> > kernel and the kernel with the patches at various user counts. A
> > positive percent means the kernel with the patches performed better,
> > while a negative percent means the baseline performed better.
> > 
> > Based on these numbers, for many of the workloads, the change was
> > beneficial in those highly contended, while it had - impact in many
> > of the lightly/moderately contended case (10 to 90 users).
> > 
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> >               |   10-90   |  100-1000   |  1100-2000
> >               |   users   |   users     |   users
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > alltests      |   -3.37%  |  -10.64%    |   -2.25%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > all_utime     |   +0.33%  |   +3.73%    |   +3.33%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > compute       |   -5.97%  |   +2.34%    |   +3.22%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > custom        |  -31.61%  |  -10.29%    |  +15.23%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > disk          |  +24.64%  |  +28.96%    |  +21.28%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > fserver       |   -1.35%  |   +4.82%    |   +9.35%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > high_systime  |   -6.73%  |   -6.28%    |  +12.36%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > shared        |  -28.31%  |  -19.99%    |   -7.10%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > short         |  -44.63%  |  -37.48%    |  -33.62%
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > 
> Thanks, Jason. Sorry for late response.
> 
> What about the variation of the tests? The machine you test on?

Hi Yuyang,

These tests were also done on an 8 socket machine (80 cores). In terms
of variation between the average throughputs, typically the noise range
is about 2% in many of the workloads.

Jason


  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-08  4:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-04 20:28 [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load Jason Low
2014-08-04 19:15 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-04 21:42   ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-05 15:42   ` Jason Low
2014-08-06 18:21   ` Jason Low
2014-08-07 18:02     ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-08  4:18       ` Jason Low [this message]
2014-08-07 22:30         ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-08  7:11           ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-07 23:15             ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-08  0:02               ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-04 20:52 ` bsegall
2014-08-04 21:27   ` Jason Low
2014-08-11 17:31   ` Jason Low
2014-08-04 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 17:53 ` Waiman Long

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=1407471532.8365.18.camel@j-VirtualBox \
    --to=jason.low2@hp.com \
    --cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
    --cc=aswin@hp.com \
    --cc=bsegall@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=riel@redhat.com \
    --cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
    --cc=yuyang.du@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.