From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759937AbYEHHjv (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 03:39:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756513AbYEHHjn (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 03:39:43 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:42820 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755412AbYEHHjm (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 May 2008 03:39:42 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 09:39:24 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Zhang, Yanmin" Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , LKML , Alexander Viro , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: AIM7 40% regression with 2.6.26-rc1 Message-ID: <20080508073924.GA30356@elte.hu> References: <1210126286.3453.37.camel@ymzhang> <1210131712.3453.43.camel@ymzhang> <87lk2mbcqp.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <20080507114643.GR19219@parisc-linux.org> <87hcdab8zp.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <1210214696.3453.87.camel@ymzhang> <20080508064340.GA27452@elte.hu> <1210230883.3453.127.camel@ymzhang> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1210230883.3453.127.camel@ymzhang> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > great! Yanmin, could you please also check the other patch i sent > > (also attached below), does it solve the regression similarly? > > With your patch, aim7 regression becomes less than 2%. I ran the > testing twice. > > Linus' patch could recover it completely. As aim7 result is quite > stable(usually fluctuating less than 1%), 1.5%~2% is a little big. is this the old original aim7 you are running, or osdl-aim-7 or re-aim-7? if it's aim7 then this is a workload that starts+stops 2000 parallel tasks that each start and exit at the same time. That might explain its sensitivity on the BKL - this is all about tty-controlled task startup and exit. i could not get it to produce anywhere close to stable results though. I also frequently get into this problem: AIM Multiuser Benchmark - Suite VII Run Beginning Tasks jobs/min jti jobs/min/task real cpu 2000 Failed to execute new_raph 200 Unable to solve equation in 100 tries. P = 1.5708, P0 = 1.5708, delta = 6.12574e-17 Failed to execute disk_cp /mnt/shm disk_cp (1): cannot open /mnt/shm/tmpa.common disk1.c: No such file or directory [.. etc. a large stream of them .. ] system has 2GB of RAM and tmpfs mounted to the place where aim7 puts its work files. Ingo