From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@linutronix.de>,
oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com
Subject: Re: [tip:timers/core] [timers] 7ee9887703: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -1.2% regression
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 11:46:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zeb4FpYEs/ocJMji@lothringen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZeaAx662HfbpMLdg@xsang-OptiPlex-9020>
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 10:17:43AM +0800, Oliver Sang wrote:
> hi, Frederic Weisbecker,
>
> On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 12:28:33PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Le Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 10:13:00AM +0800, Oliver Sang a écrit :
> > > On Mon, Mar 04, 2024 at 01:32:45AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > Le Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 04:09:24PM +0800, kernel test robot a écrit :
> > > > > commit:
> > > > > 57e95a5c41 ("timers: Introduce function to check timer base is_idle flag")
> > > > > 7ee9887703 ("timers: Implement the hierarchical pull model")
> > > >
> > > > Is this something that is observed also with the commits that follow in this
> > > > branch?
> > >
> > > when this bisect done, we also tested the tip of timers/core branch at that time
> > > 8b3843ae3634b vdso/datapage: Quick fix - use asm/page-def.h for ARM64
> > >
> > > the regression still exists on it:
> > >
> > > 57e95a5c4117dc6a 7ee988770326fca440472200c3e 8b3843ae3634b472530fb69c386
> > > ---------------- --------------------------- ---------------------------
> > > %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev
> > > \ | \ | \
> > > 4.10 -1.2% 4.05 -1.2% 4.05 netperf.ThroughputBoth_Mbps
> > > 1049 -1.2% 1037 -1.2% 1036 netperf.ThroughputBoth_total_Mbps
> > > 4.10 -1.2% 4.05 -1.2% 4.05 netperf.Throughput_Mbps
> > > 1049 -1.2% 1037 -1.2% 1036 netperf.Throughput_total_Mbps
> >
> > Oh, I see... :-/
> >
> > > > Ie: would it be possible to compare instead:
> > > >
> > > > 57e95a5c4117 (timers: Introduce function to check timer base is_idle flag)
> > > > VS
> > > > b2cf7507e186 (timers: Always queue timers on the local CPU)
> > > >
> > > > Because the improvements introduced by 7ee9887703 are mostly relevant after
> > > > b2cf7507e186.
> > >
> > > got it. will test.
> > >
> > > at the same time, we noticed current tip of timers/core is
> > > a184d9835a0a6 (tip/timers/core) tick/sched: Fix build failure for
> > > CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON=n
> >
> > Shouldn't be a problem as it fixes an issue introduced after:
> >
> > b2cf7507e186 (timers: Always queue timers on the local CPU)
> >
> > >
> > > though it seems irelevant, we will still get data for it.
> >
> > Thanks a lot, this will be very helpful. Especially with all the perf diff
> > details like in the initial email report.
>
> the regression still exists on b2cf7507e186 and current tip of the branch:
>
> =========================================================================================
> cluster/compiler/cpufreq_governor/ip/kconfig/nr_threads/rootfs/runtime/tbox_group/test/testcase:
> cs-localhost/gcc-12/performance/ipv4/x86_64-rhel-8.3/200%/debian-12-x86_64-20240206.cgz/300s/lkp-icl-2sp2/SCTP_STREAM/netperf
>
> commit:
> 57e95a5c4117 (timers: Introduce function to check timer base is_idle flag)
> b2cf7507e186 (timers: Always queue timers on the local CPU)
> a184d9835a0a (tick/sched: Fix build failure for CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON=n)
>
> a184d9835a0a689261ea6a4a8dbc18173a031b77
>
> 57e95a5c4117dc6a b2cf7507e18649a30512515ec0c a184d9835a0a689261ea6a4a8db
> ---------------- --------------------------- ---------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \ | \
> 4.10 -1.4% 4.04 -1.5% 4.04 netperf.ThroughputBoth_Mbps
> 1049 -1.4% 1034 -1.5% 1033 netperf.ThroughputBoth_total_Mbps
> 4.10 -1.4% 4.04 -1.5% 4.04 netperf.Throughput_Mbps
> 1049 -1.4% 1034 -1.5% 1033 netperf.Throughput_total_Mbps
>
> details are in below [1]
Thanks a lot!
>
> > Because I'm having some troubles
> > running those lkp tests. How is it working BTW? I've seen it downloading
> > two kernel trees but I haven't noticed a kernel build.
>
> you need build 7ee9887703 and its parent kernel with config in
> https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240301/202403011511.24defbbd-oliver.sang@intel.com
> then boot into kernel.
>
> after that, you could run netperf in each kernel by following
> https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240301/202403011511.24defbbd-oliver.sang@intel.com/reproduce
> to get data.
>
> the results will store in different path according the kernel commit, then you
> could compare the results from both kernels.
Oh I see now.
>
> what's your OS BTW? we cannot support all distributions so far...
Opensuse, but it failed to find a lot of equivalent packages.
Then I tried Ubuntu 22.04.4 LTS but it failed saying perf didn't have the
"sched" subcommand. Which distro do you recommand using?
>
> > Are the two compared
> > instances running through kvm?
>
> we run performance tests on bare mental. for netperf, we just test on one
> machine so the test is really upon local net.
Ok.
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-05 10:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-01 8:09 [tip:timers/core] [timers] 7ee9887703: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -1.2% regression kernel test robot
2024-03-04 0:32 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-04 2:13 ` Oliver Sang
2024-03-04 11:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-05 2:17 ` Oliver Sang
2024-03-05 10:46 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2024-03-05 11:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-05 11:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-12 23:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2024-03-13 8:25 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-03-13 14:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
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=Zeb4FpYEs/ocJMji@lothringen \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=anna-maria@linutronix.de \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.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.