From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Jirka Hladky <jhladky@redhat.com>,
"Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>
Cc: paulmck@kernel.org, maddy@linux.ibm.com,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
npiggin@gmail.com, bigeasy@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] powerpc: enable dynamic preemption
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 13:32:27 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4be922b5-7dc2-48c1-938c-de02245bc5e2@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE4VaGD0Ekz+5s26iTW=UV4PuBkUm9AzorBgAVGJBjttH7sMWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi.
On 7/31/26 12:48 PM, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2026 at 7:03 AM Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
> <chleroy@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 30/07/2026 à 19:10, Shrikanth Hegde a écrit :
>>> Hi Jirka, Paul,
>>>
>>>
>>> +cc will
>>>
>>> On 7/30/26 8:38 PM, Jirka Hladky wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 4:53 PM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> But is this really a fundamental RISC cost? For example, does arm64
>>>>> see the same performance issues?
>>>>
>>>> We tested arm64 (Ampere Altra Max) with the same controlled
>>>> experiment -- two 6.18 kernels, both voluntary, differing only in
>>>> PREEMPT_DYNAMIC:
>>>>
>>>> Arch PREEMPT_DYNAMIC kill bogo-ops/sec Delta
>>>> ------- --------------- ----------------- -----
>>>> ppc64le off 108,836
>>>> ppc64le on 68,197 -37.3%
>>>> aarch64 off 5,538
>>>> aarch64 on 5,082 -8.2%
>>>>
>>>> arm64 sees -8.2% vs ppc64le's -37.3%. So arm64 is affected but
>>>> much less severely.
>>>
>>> Ouch!. But that's good to know.
>>
>> Might be a stupid question, but what is your .config ?
>> Are you sure it doesn't contain CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT ?
>
> I have double-checked that and it's not set:
> # CONFIG_DEBUG_PREEMPT is not set
>
> Thanks
> Jirka
>
Coming into numbers, I did notice later, arm64 numbers are almost 20x less.
I believe you are having similar core count or benchmark is same.
But if we compare the time taken for each operations, it tells a different story.
PREEMPT_DYNAMIC
ppc64le off 108836 ops/s = 9.19 us/op
ppc64le on 68197 ops/s = 14.66 us/op
delta +5.47 us/op
aarch64 off 5538 ops/s = 180.57 us/op
aarch64 on 5082 ops/s = 196.77 us/op
delta +16.20 us/op
PS: I tried porting some of those changes in arm64 to powerpc to split preempt count into
two. but i don;t see much improvement there. If i see get better numbers i will reply with
that.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-31 8:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-10 18:43 [PATCH v4 0/1] powerpc: Enable dynamic preemption Shrikanth Hegde
2025-02-10 18:43 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] powerpc: enable " Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-26 18:33 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-27 4:18 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-27 10:13 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-27 10:28 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-27 10:35 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-07-27 16:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-27 10:59 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-27 11:03 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-27 12:34 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-27 16:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-27 16:50 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-27 17:10 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-27 18:29 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-07-28 5:27 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-28 16:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-28 16:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-30 13:01 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-30 14:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-28 0:26 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-28 5:11 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-28 14:19 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-30 6:44 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-30 12:08 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-30 14:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-30 15:08 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-30 16:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-30 17:10 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-07-30 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-30 18:40 ` Segher Boessenkool
2026-07-31 4:59 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-07-31 5:03 ` Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)
2026-07-31 7:18 ` Jirka Hladky
2026-07-31 8:02 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
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=4be922b5-7dc2-48c1-938c-de02245bc5e2@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=jhladky@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.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