From: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@redhat.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] timekeeping: Rework frequency adjustments to work better w/ nohz
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 18:58:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140128175804.GA5287@netboy> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52D42D36.1020400@linaro.org>
I tested for a regression using the patched kernel with the nohz=off
command line option...
On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:15:18AM -0800, John Stultz wrote:
> On 01/13/2014 09:51 AM, Richard Cochran wrote:
> >
> > - Linux 3.12.7-nohz-plain-20140106 nohz-plain.log
> > - Linux 3.12.7-nohz-plain-20140106 NOHZ=OFF periodic-plain.log
> > - Linux 3.12.7-nohz-fix-20140106-00001-gd753140 nohz-fix.log
Regression check:
- Linux homeboy 3.12.7-nohz-fix-20140106-00001-gd753140 NOHZ=OFF
nohz-fix-periodic.log
> > The performance in the log files as reflected in the clock offset is
> > summarized in this table. The values are in nanoseconds.
> >
> > | | periodic-plain | nohz-fix | nohz-plain |
> > |---------+----------------+---------------+---------------|
> > | minimum | -1.599000e+03 | -1.051000e+03 | -5.373700e+04 |
> > | maximum | +1.311000e+03 | +1.048000e+03 | +6.389500e+04 |
> > | mean | +9.880240e-02 | -7.747305e+01 | +1.597904e+01 |
> > | stddev | +4.610021e+02 | +3.960978e+02 | +1.491263e+04 |
Comparing the nohz=off case with and without the patch, the three hour
test looks like this.
| | periodic-plain | nohz-fix-periodic |
|---------+----------------+-------------------+
| minimum | -1.599000e+03 | -1.427000e+03 |
| maximum | +1.311000e+03 | +1.279000e+03 |
| mean | +9.880240e-02 | -2.710778e+01 |
| stddev | +4.610021e+02 | +3.974372e+02 |
> > http://linuxptp.sourceforge.net/nohz-fix/current_nohz.png
> > http://linuxptp.sourceforge.net/nohz-fix/periodic_vs_fix.png
I also made a third graph showing before and after the patch.
http://linuxptp.sourceforge.net/nohz-fix/nohz_regression.png
> If you do get a chance to look again, I'd also be interested if running
> with nohz=off w/ the fix doesn't show any regression compared to the
> unmodified nohz=off case.
Looks like there is no regression.
Thanks,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-28 17:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-07 3:57 [PATCH] [RFC] timekeeping: Rework frequency adjustments to work better w/ nohz John Stultz
2014-01-13 17:51 ` Richard Cochran
2014-01-13 18:15 ` John Stultz
2014-01-14 7:07 ` Richard Cochran
2014-01-28 17:58 ` Richard Cochran [this message]
2014-01-29 17:56 ` John Stultz
2014-02-07 11:45 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2014-02-07 18:21 ` John Stultz
2014-02-12 15:42 ` Miroslav Lichvar
2014-04-24 4:22 ` John Stultz
2014-04-24 11:28 ` Miroslav Lichvar
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=20140128175804.GA5287@netboy \
--to=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=john.stultz@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mlichvar@redhat.com \
--cc=prarit@redhat.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.