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 19:14:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200818171457.GA736234@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHhAz+hG5kS5rhph4SaSLOEc5PgcSOTPWpiANLNpwotY9Zy6qQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 10:24:13PM +0530, Muni Sekhar wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 8:06 PM Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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?
You didn't answer this question, is this the same kernel source being
compared here? Same version? Same compiler? Everything identical?
> > > 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 :)
> I created the difference between two kernel config files and then
> tried to spot the CONFIG*SCHED* differences.
> Interestingly I see the difference in I/O scheduler config, 1st system
> is set to “deadline” and other one is set to “cfq”. So I made it equal
> by echoing to “/sys/block/<disk device>/queue/scheduler" but still no
> change in scheduler benchmark metrics.
>
> Is it the correct way to find the differences between kernels? If so,
> what other important CONFIG_* variables need to consider?
>
>
> $ cat config.patch | grep -i sched
>
> CONFIG_HAVE_UNSTABLE_SCHED_CLOCK=y
> CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y
> CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED=y
> # CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED is not set
> # IO Schedulers
> @@ -369,10 +434,14 @@ CONFIG_IOSCHED_NOOP=y
> CONFIG_IOSCHED_DEADLINE=y
> CONFIG_IOSCHED_CFQ=y
> CONFIG_CFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED=y
> -CONFIG_DEFAULT_IOSCHED="deadline"
> +CONFIG_DEFAULT_IOSCHED="cfq"
> +CONFIG_MQ_IOSCHED_DEADLINE=m
> +CONFIG_MQ_IOSCHED_KYBER=m
> +CONFIG_IOSCHED_BFQ=m
> +CONFIG_BFQ_GROUP_IOSCHED=y
> CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=y
> CONFIG_SCHED_MC=y
> +CONFIG_SCHED_MC_PRIO=y
> +# CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_SCHEDUTIL is not set
> +CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_GOV_SCHEDUTIL=y
There's lots of other options that affect performance, depending on your
specific benchmark, other than these.
good luck!
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-18 17:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-18 14:30 Scheduler benchmarks Muni Sekhar
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 17:14 ` Greg KH [this message]
2020-08-18 17:31 ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 17:36 ` Greg KH
2020-08-18 17:53 ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-18 18:15 ` peter enderborg
2020-08-19 10:16 ` Muni Sekhar
2020-08-19 10:21 ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2020-08-19 14:36 ` David Laight
2020-08-19 10:42 ` Greg KH
2020-08-19 16:43 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2020-08-19 16:47 ` Greg KH
2021-04-29 21:32 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
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=20200818171457.GA736234@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 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).