All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Muni Sekhar <munisekharrms@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>
Subject: Re: Scheduler benchmarks
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 16:36:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818143633.GA628293@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHhAz+inPwKYx_4qaujQ=bGG9twashiuqLhQQ-+vgHWF7FLhRA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 08:00:11PM +0530, Muni Sekhar wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I’ve two identical Linux systems with only kernel differences.

What are the differences in the kernels?

> While doing kernel profiling with perf, I got the below mentioned
> metrics for Scheduler benchmarks.
> 
> 1st system (older kernel version compared to the other system) benchmark result:
> 
> $ perf bench sched messaging -g 64
> # Running 'sched/messaging' benchmark:
> # 20 sender and receiver processes per group
> # 64 groups == 2560 processes run
> 
>      Total time: 2.936 [sec]
> 
> 
> 2nd system benchmark result:
> 
> $ perf bench sched messaging -g 64
> # Running 'sched/messaging' benchmark:
> # 20 sender and receiver processes per group
> # 64 groups == 2560 processes run
> 
>      Total time: 10.074 [sec]
> 
> 
> So as per scheduler benchmark results, clearly a huge difference
> between two systems.
> Can anyone suggest to me how to dive deeper to know the root cause for
> it.

Look a the differences between your different kernels, that would be a
great start :)

good luck!

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Muni Sekhar <munisekharrms@gmail.com>
Cc: kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Scheduler benchmarks
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2020 16:36:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818143633.GA628293@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHhAz+inPwKYx_4qaujQ=bGG9twashiuqLhQQ-+vgHWF7FLhRA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 08:00:11PM +0530, Muni Sekhar wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I’ve two identical Linux systems with only kernel differences.

What are the differences in the kernels?

> While doing kernel profiling with perf, I got the below mentioned
> metrics for Scheduler benchmarks.
> 
> 1st system (older kernel version compared to the other system) benchmark result:
> 
> $ perf bench sched messaging -g 64
> # Running 'sched/messaging' benchmark:
> # 20 sender and receiver processes per group
> # 64 groups == 2560 processes run
> 
>      Total time: 2.936 [sec]
> 
> 
> 2nd system benchmark result:
> 
> $ perf bench sched messaging -g 64
> # Running 'sched/messaging' benchmark:
> # 20 sender and receiver processes per group
> # 64 groups == 2560 processes run
> 
>      Total time: 10.074 [sec]
> 
> 
> So as per scheduler benchmark results, clearly a huge difference
> between two systems.
> Can anyone suggest to me how to dive deeper to know the root cause for
> it.

Look a the differences between your different kernels, that would be a
great start :)

good luck!

greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-18 14:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-18 14:30 Scheduler benchmarks Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 14:30 ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 14:36 ` Greg KH [this message]
2020-08-18 14:36   ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 16:01   ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 16:50   ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 16:54   ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 16:54     ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 17:14     ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 17:14       ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 17:31       ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 17:31         ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 17:36         ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 17:36           ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 17:53           ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 17:53             ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 18:15             ` peter enderborg
2020-08-18 18:15               ` peter enderborg
2020-08-18 18:15               ` peter enderborg
2020-08-19 10:16               ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-19 10:16                 ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-19 10:21                 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2020-08-19 10:21                   ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2020-08-19 14:36                   ` David Laight
2020-08-19 14:36                     ` David Laight
2020-08-19 10:42                 ` Greg KH
2020-08-19 10:42                   ` Greg KH
2020-08-19 16:43                   ` Valdis Klētnieks
2020-08-19 16:43                     ` Valdis Klētnieks
2020-08-19 16:47                     ` Greg KH
2020-08-19 16:47                       ` Greg KH
2021-04-29 21:32                 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2021-04-29 21:32                   ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2020-08-25 17:06 ` Mulyadi Santosa

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=20200818143633.GA628293@kroah.com \
    --to=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=munisekharrms@gmail.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.