From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org
Subject: Re: Fw: [lkp-developer] [sched,rcu] cf7a2dca60: [No primary change] +186% will-it-scale.time.involuntary_context_switches
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 10:54:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161214095425.GE25573@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161213151408.GC3924@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Tue 13-12-16 07:14:08, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Just FYI for the moment...
>
> So even with the slowed-down checking, making cond_resched() do what
> cond_resched_rcu_qs() does results in a smallish but quite measurable
> degradation according to 0day.
So if I understand those results properly, the reason seems to be the
increased involuntary context switches, right? Or am I misreading the
data?
I am looking at your "sched,rcu: Make cond_resched() provide RCU
quiescent state" in linux-next and I am wondering whether rcu_all_qs has
to be called unconditionally and not only when should_resched failed few
times? I guess you have discussed that with Peter already but do not
remember the outcome.
Thanks for letting my know!
> I will try some things to reduce the
> impact, but it is quite possible that we will need to live with both
> interfaces.
Thanks a lot for your time!
> Thanx, Paul
>
> ----- Forwarded message from kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> -----
>
> Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 13:52:28 +0800
> From: kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com>
> TO: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: lkp@01.org
> Subject: [lkp-developer] [sched,rcu] cf7a2dca60: [No primary change] +186%
> will-it-scale.time.involuntary_context_switches
>
> Greeting,
>
> There is no primary kpi change in this test, below is the data collected through multiple monitors running background just for your information.
>
>
> commit: cf7a2dca6056544bb04a8f819fbbdb415bdb2933 ("sched,rcu: Make cond_resched() provide RCU quiescent state")
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git dev.2016.12.05c
>
> in testcase: will-it-scale
> on test machine: 32 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 0 @ 2.70GHz with 64G memory
> with following parameters:
>
> test: unlink2
> cpufreq_governor: performance
>
> test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
>
>
>
> Details are as below:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>
>
> To reproduce:
>
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git
> cd lkp-tests
> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
> bin/lkp run job.yaml
>
> testcase/path_params/tbox_group/run: will-it-scale/unlink2-performance/lkp-sb03
>
> 15705d6709cb6ba6 cf7a2dca6056544bb04a8f819f
> ---------------- --------------------------
> %stddev change %stddev
> \ | \
> 116286 114432 will-it-scale.per_process_ops
> 20902 +- 5% 186% 59731 +- 5% will-it-scale.time.involuntary_context_switches
> 2694 +- 8% 61% 4344 vmstat.system.cs
> 10903 +- 99% -1e+04 148 +- 5% latency_stats.max.wait_on_page_bit.__migration_entry_wait.migration_entry_wait.do_swap_page.handle_mm_fault.__do_page_fault.do_page_fault.page_fault
> 3583 +- 38% 1e+04 14010 +- 51% latency_stats.sum.ep_poll.SyS_epoll_wait.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 4143 +- 24% 1e+04 14549 +- 51% latency_stats.sum.ep_poll.SyS_epoll_wait.do_syscall_64.return_from_SYSCALL_64
> 271108 +- 71% -2e+05 66364 +- 32% latency_stats.sum.wait_on_page_bit.__migration_entry_wait.migration_entry_wait.do_swap_page.handle_mm_fault.__do_page_fault.do_page_fault.page_fault
> 834637 +- 8% 62% 1351381 perf-stat.context-switches
> 16449 +- 3% 54% 25349 +- 3% perf-stat.cpu-migrations
> 25.94 35% 35.02 perf-stat.node-store-miss-rate%
> 2.534e+09 32% 3.335e+09 perf-stat.node-store-misses
> 1.002e+12 4% 1.043e+12 perf-stat.dTLB-stores
> 50923913 3% 52692115 perf-stat.iTLB-loads
> 1.696e+12 1.745e+12 perf-stat.dTLB-loads
> 1.258e+12 1.291e+12 perf-stat.branch-instructions
> 6.132e+12 6.274e+12 perf-stat.instructions
> 0.37 0.38 perf-stat.ipc
> 0.37 -3% 0.35 perf-stat.branch-miss-rate%
> 29.83 -4% 28.66 perf-stat.cache-miss-rate%
> 1.117e+10 -4% 1.071e+10 perf-stat.cache-misses
> 7.232e+09 -14% 6.187e+09 perf-stat.node-stores
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-14 9:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-13 15:14 Fw: [lkp-developer] [sched,rcu] cf7a2dca60: [No primary change] +186% will-it-scale.time.involuntary_context_switches Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-14 9:54 ` Michal Hocko [this message]
2016-12-14 11:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-14 16:15 ` Michal Hocko
2016-12-14 16:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2016-12-14 17:39 ` Michal Hocko
2017-01-04 0:55 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20161214095425.GE25573@dhcp22.suse.cz \
--to=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).