From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
mingo@kernel.org, mgorman@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched,numa: document and fix numa_preferred_nid setting
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 22:46:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150619171633.GC16576@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5582F944.6080204@redhat.com>
>
> OK, so we are looking at two multi-threaded processes
> on a 4 node system, and waiting for them to converge?
>
> It may make sense to add my patch in with your patch
> 1/4 from last week, as well as the correct part of
> your patch 4/4, and see how they all work together.
>
Tested specjbb and autonumabenchmark on 4 kernels.
Plain 4.1.0-rc7-tip (i)
tip + only Rik's patch (ii)
tip + Rik's ++ (iii)
tip + Srikar's ++ (iv)
(i) = Plain 4.1.0-rc7-tip = tip = 4.1.0-rc7 (b7ca96b)
(ii) = tip + only Rik's patch = (i) + Rik's fix numa_preferred_nid setting
(iii) = tip + Rik's ++ (iii) = (ii) + Srikar's numa hotness + correct nid for evaluating task weight
(iv) = tip + Srikar's ++ (iv) = (i) + Srikar's numa hotness + correct nid for evaluating task weight +
numa_has_capacity fix + always update preferred node
Plain 4.1.0-rc7-tip (i)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
elapsed_numa01: 858.85 949.18 915.64 33.06
elapsed_numa02: 23.09 29.89 26.43 2.18
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
system_numa01: 1516.72 1855.08 1686.24 113.95
system_numa02: 63.69 79.06 70.35 5.87
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
user_numa01: 73284.76 80818.21 78060.88 2773.60
user_numa02: 1690.18 2071.07 1821.64 140.25
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
total_numa01: 74801.50 82572.60 79747.12 2875.61
total_numa02: 1753.87 2142.77 1891.99 143.59
tip + only Rik's patch (ii)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
elapsed_numa01: 665.26 877.47 776.77 79.23 15.83%
elapsed_numa02: 24.59 31.30 28.17 2.48 -5.56%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
system_numa01: 659.57 1220.99 942.36 234.92 60.92%
system_numa02: 44.62 86.01 64.64 14.24 6.64%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
user_numa01: 56280.95 75908.81 64993.57 7764.30 17.21%
user_numa02: 1790.35 2155.02 1916.12 132.57 -4.38%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
total_numa01: 56940.50 77128.20 65935.92 7993.49 17.91%
total_numa02: 1834.97 2227.03 1980.76 136.51 -3.99%
tip + Rik's ++ (iii)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
elapsed_numa01: 630.60 860.06 760.07 74.33 18.09%
elapsed_numa02: 21.92 34.42 27.72 4.49 -3.75%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
system_numa01: 474.31 1379.49 870.12 296.35 59.16%
system_numa02: 63.74 120.25 86.69 20.69 -13.59%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
user_numa01: 53004.03 68125.84 61697.01 5011.38 24.02%
user_numa02: 1650.82 2278.71 1941.26 224.59 -5.25%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
total_numa01: 53478.30 69505.30 62567.12 5288.18 24.72%
total_numa02: 1714.56 2398.96 2027.95 238.08 -5.67%
tip + Srikar's ++ (iv)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
elapsed_numa01: 690.74 919.49 782.67 78.51 14.46%
elapsed_numa02: 21.78 29.57 26.02 2.65 1.39%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
system_numa01: 659.12 1041.19 870.15 143.13 78.38%
system_numa02: 52.20 78.73 64.18 11.28 7.84%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
user_numa01: 56410.39 71492.31 62514.78 5444.90 21.75%
user_numa02: 1594.27 1934.40 1754.37 126.41 3.48%
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
total_numa01: 57069.50 72509.90 63384.94 5567.71 22.57%
total_numa02: 1647.85 2010.87 1818.55 136.88 3.65%
5 interations of Specjbb on 4 node, 24 core powerpc machine.
Ran 1 instance per system.
For specjbb (higher bops per JVM is better)
Plain 4.1.0-rc7-tip (i)
Metric: Min Max Avg StdDev
bopsperJVM: 265519.00 272466.00 269377.80 2391.04
tip + only Rik's patch (ii)
Metric: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
bopsperJVM: 263393.00 269660.00 266920.20 2792.07 -0.91%
tip + Rik's ++ (iii)
Metric: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
bopsperJVM: 264298.00 271236.00 266818.20 2579.62 -0.94%
tip + Srikar's ++ (iv)
Metric: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
bopsperJVM: 266774.00 272434.00 269839.60 2083.19 +0.17%
So fix for numa_has_capacity and always setting preferred node based on
fault stats seems to help autonuma and specjbb.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-19 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-16 19:54 [PATCH] sched,numa: document and fix numa_preferred_nid setting Rik van Riel
2015-06-18 15:55 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-18 16:06 ` Rik van Riel
2015-06-18 16:41 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-18 17:00 ` Rik van Riel
2015-06-18 17:11 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-19 17:16 ` Srikar Dronamraju [this message]
2015-06-19 17:52 ` Rik van Riel
2015-06-22 16:04 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-22 16:48 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-18 16:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-06-18 18:16 ` Rik van Riel
2015-06-22 16:13 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2015-06-22 22:28 ` Rik van Riel
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=20150619171633.GC16576@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@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.