Re: NUMA? bisected performance regression 3.11->3.12

[Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>]

On 11/26/2013 02:32 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 02:57:18PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> I'm running an open/close microbenchmark from the will-it-scale set:
>>> https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale/blob/master/tests/open1.c
>>
>> I was seeing some weird symptoms on 3.12 vs 3.11.  The throughput in
>> that test was going from down from 50 million to 35 million.
>>
>> The profiles show an increase in cpu time in _raw_spin_lock_irq.  The
>> profiles pointed to slub code that hasn't been touched in quite a while.
>>  I bisected it down to:
> 
> Dave, do you mind retesting this against "[RFC PATCH 0/5] Memory compaction
> efficiency improvements" please? I have not finished reviewing the series
> yet but patch 3 mentions lower allocation success rates with Johannes'
> patch and notes that it is unlikely to be a bug with the patch itself.

Sorry for the delay.  I lost monster box for a few days...

That series didn't look to have much of an effect.  Before/after numbers
coming out of that open1 test were both ~35M.  If it helped, it was in
the noise.


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>