From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>,
Aubrey Li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
Barry Song <song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Couple wakee flips with heavy wakers
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:00:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211027090020.GO3959@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <93033bdc35fb2ddd374700b76324de88639ef5ae.camel@gmx.de>
On Wed, Oct 27, 2021 at 04:09:12AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-10-26 at 14:13 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Tue, 2021-10-26 at 12:57 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > >
> > > The patch in question was also tested on other workloads on NUMA
> > > machines. For a 2-socket machine (20 cores, HT enabled so 40 CPUs)
> > > running specjbb 2005 with one JVM per NUMA node, the patch also
> > > scaled
> > > reasonably well
> >
> > That's way more more interesting. No idea what this thing does under
> > the hood thus whether it should be helped or not, but at least it's a
> > real deal benchmark vs a kernel hacker tool.
>
> ...
> Installing test specjbb
> specjvm-install: Fetching from mirror
> http://mcp/mmtests-mirror/spec/SPECjbb2005_kitv1.07.tar.gz
> specjvm-install: Fetching from internet
> NOT_AVAILABLE/SPECjbb2005_kitv1.07.tar.gz
> specjvm-install: Fetching from alt internet
> /SPECjbb2005_kitv1.07.tar.gz
> FATAL specjvm-install: specjvm-install: Could not download
> /SPECjbb2005_kitv1.07.tar.gz
> FATAL specjbb-bench: specjbb install script returned error
> FATAL: specjbb returned failure, unable to continue
> FATAL: Installation step failed for specjbb
>
> Hohum, so much for trying to take a peek.
>
The benchmark is not available for free unfortunately.
> At any rate, unlike the tbench numbers, these have the look of signal
> rather than test jig noise, and pretty strong signal at that, so maybe
> patchlet should fly. At the very least, it appears to be saying that
> there is significant performance to be had by some means.
>
> Bah, fly or die little patchlet. Either way there will be winners and
> losers, that's just the way it works if you're not shaving cycles.
>
So, I assume you are ok for patch 1 to take flight to either live or
die. I'll handle any bugs that show up in relation to it. How about
patch 2?
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-27 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-21 14:56 [PATCH 0/2] Reduce stacking and overscheduling Mel Gorman
2021-10-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Couple wakee flips with heavy wakers Mel Gorman
2021-10-22 10:26 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-22 11:05 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-22 12:00 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-25 6:35 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-26 8:18 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-26 10:15 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-26 10:41 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-26 11:57 ` Mel Gorman
2021-10-26 12:13 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-27 2:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-27 9:00 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2021-10-27 10:18 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-11-09 11:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-11-09 12:55 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-21 14:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Increase wakeup_gran if current task has not executed the minimum granularity Mel Gorman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-10-28 9:48 [PATCH v4 0/2] Reduce stacking and overscheduling Mel Gorman
2021-10-28 9:48 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Couple wakee flips with heavy wakers Mel Gorman
2021-10-28 16:19 ` Tao Zhou
2021-10-29 8:42 ` Mel Gorman
2021-11-10 9:53 ` Tao Zhou
2021-11-10 15:40 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-29 15:17 ` Vincent Guittot
2021-10-30 3:11 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-10-30 4:12 ` Mike Galbraith
2021-11-01 8:56 ` 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=20211027090020.GO3959@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
/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.