From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:34:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180212173449.GA25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180212171131.26139-3-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 05:11:31PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> However, the benefit in other cases is large. This is the result for NAS
> with the D class sizing on a 4-socket machine
>
> 4.15.0 4.15.0
> sdnuma-v1r23 delayretry-v1r23
> Time cg.D 557.00 ( 0.00%) 431.82 ( 22.47%)
> Time ep.D 77.83 ( 0.00%) 79.01 ( -1.52%)
> Time is.D 26.46 ( 0.00%) 26.64 ( -0.68%)
> Time lu.D 727.14 ( 0.00%) 597.94 ( 17.77%)
> Time mg.D 191.35 ( 0.00%) 146.85 ( 23.26%)
Last time I checked, we were some ~25% from OMP_PROC_BIND with NAS, this
seems to close that hole significantly. Do you happen to have
OMP_PROC_BIND numbers handy to see how far away we are from manual
affinity?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-12 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-12 17:11 [PATCH 0/2] Stop wake_affine fighting with automatic NUMA balancing Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Consider SD_NUMA when selecting the most idle group to schedule on Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 11:35 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 13:29 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:34 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-02-12 17:52 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-12 18:11 ` Mel Gorman
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=20180212173449.GA25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
/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.