public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement
@ 2024-11-13 18:03 Joseph Salisbury
  2024-11-13 18:19 ` Phil Auld
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Salisbury @ 2024-11-13 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: peterz, mingo
  Cc: juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann, Steven Rostedt,
	bsegall, mgorman, vschneid, linux-kernel, linux-kernel

Hello,

During performance testing, we found a regression of ~9% performance 
with the TPCC benchmark.   This performance regression was introduced in 
v6.6-rc1.  After a bisect, the following commit was identified as the 
cause of the regression:

86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")

I was hoping to get some feedback from the scheduler folks.  Do you 
think gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue?  Are 
there any tunable options that can changed to see how performance is 
affected?


Thanks,

Joe








^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement
  2024-11-13 18:03 [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement Joseph Salisbury
@ 2024-11-13 18:19 ` Phil Auld
  2024-11-13 18:22   ` [External] : " Joseph Salisbury
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Phil Auld @ 2024-11-13 18:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Joseph Salisbury
  Cc: peterz, mingo, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, bsegall, mgorman, vschneid, linux-kernel

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 01:03:00PM -0500 Joseph Salisbury wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> During performance testing, we found a regression of ~9% performance with
> the TPCC benchmark.   This performance regression was introduced in
> v6.6-rc1.  After a bisect, the following commit was identified as the cause
> of the regression:
> 
> 86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")
> 
> I was hoping to get some feedback from the scheduler folks.  Do you think
> gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue?  Are there any
> tunable options that can changed to see how performance is affected?
> 

You can try turning off the PLACE_LAG sched feature:

    echo NO_PLACE_LAG > /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features

It's not what I'd call a tunable but it would allow you to test w/o it and
see what it does.  It should allow you to switch back and forth easily for
testing. 


Cheers,
Phil

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joe
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [External] : Re: [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement
  2024-11-13 18:19 ` Phil Auld
@ 2024-11-13 18:22   ` Joseph Salisbury
  2024-11-13 18:33     ` Joseph Salisbury
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Salisbury @ 2024-11-13 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Phil Auld
  Cc: peterz, mingo, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, bsegall, mgorman, vschneid, linux-kernel




On 11/13/24 13:19, Phil Auld wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 01:03:00PM -0500 Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> During performance testing, we found a regression of ~9% performance with
>> the TPCC benchmark.   This performance regression was introduced in
>> v6.6-rc1.  After a bisect, the following commit was identified as the cause
>> of the regression:
>>
>> 86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")
>>
>> I was hoping to get some feedback from the scheduler folks.  Do you think
>> gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue?  Are there any
>> tunable options that can changed to see how performance is affected?
>>
> You can try turning off the PLACE_LAG sched feature:
>
>      echo NO_PLACE_LAG > /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features
>
> It's not what I'd call a tunable but it would allow you to test w/o it and
> see what it does.  It should allow you to switch back and forth easily for
> testing.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Phil
Thanks so much for the suggestion, Phil!  I will give that a try and 
report the results.
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement
  2024-11-13 18:22   ` [External] : " Joseph Salisbury
@ 2024-11-13 18:33     ` Joseph Salisbury
  2024-11-14 19:50       ` [External] : " Joseph Salisbury
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Salisbury @ 2024-11-13 18:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Phil Auld
  Cc: peterz, mingo, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, bsegall, mgorman, vschneid, linux-kernel




On 11/13/24 13:22, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/13/24 13:19, Phil Auld wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 01:03:00PM -0500 Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> During performance testing, we found a regression of ~9% performance 
>>> with
>>> the TPCC benchmark.   This performance regression was introduced in
>>> v6.6-rc1.  After a bisect, the following commit was identified as 
>>> the cause
>>> of the regression:
>>>
>>> 86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")
>>>
>>> I was hoping to get some feedback from the scheduler folks. Do you 
>>> think
>>> gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue? Are 
>>> there any
>>> tunable options that can changed to see how performance is affected?
>>>
>> You can try turning off the PLACE_LAG sched feature:
>>
>>      echo NO_PLACE_LAG > /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features
>>
>> It's not what I'd call a tunable but it would allow you to test w/o 
>> it and
>> see what it does.  It should allow you to switch back and forth 
>> easily for
>> testing.
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Phil
> Thanks so much for the suggestion, Phil!  I will give that a try and 
> report the results.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
I just noticed this thread, which is probably related:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZxuujhhrJcoYOdMJ@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com/T/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [External] : Re: [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement
  2024-11-13 18:33     ` Joseph Salisbury
@ 2024-11-14 19:50       ` Joseph Salisbury
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Salisbury @ 2024-11-14 19:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Phil Auld
  Cc: peterz, mingo, juri.lelli, vincent.guittot, dietmar.eggemann,
	Steven Rostedt, bsegall, mgorman, vschneid, linux-kernel




On 11/13/24 13:33, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/13/24 13:22, Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/13/24 13:19, Phil Auld wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 01:03:00PM -0500 Joseph Salisbury wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> During performance testing, we found a regression of ~9% 
>>>> performance with
>>>> the TPCC benchmark.   This performance regression was introduced in
>>>> v6.6-rc1.  After a bisect, the following commit was identified as 
>>>> the cause
>>>> of the regression:
>>>>
>>>> 86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")
>>>>
>>>> I was hoping to get some feedback from the scheduler folks. Do you 
>>>> think
>>>> gathering any additional data will help diagnose this issue? Are 
>>>> there any
>>>> tunable options that can changed to see how performance is affected?
>>>>
>>> You can try turning off the PLACE_LAG sched feature:
>>>
>>>      echo NO_PLACE_LAG > /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features
>>>
>>> It's not what I'd call a tunable but it would allow you to test w/o 
>>> it and
>>> see what it does.  It should allow you to switch back and forth 
>>> easily for
>>> testing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Phil
>> Thanks so much for the suggestion, Phil!  I will give that a try and 
>> report the results.
We can confirm that using NO_PLACE_LAG adds back 5% of the performance 
that was lost.  However, we have not yet measured what effect this will 
have on other benchmarks.

We will continue testing and can help test the patches that add 
PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY as sysctl options.
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
> I just noticed this thread, which is probably related:
> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/ZxuujhhrJcoYOdMJ@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com/T/__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!MhxYsyXTgwxk1HIWrxUHGSEZcJyBENlm5apMv2TEqf6Tn2uoi14-V8YSTymPDvjax78DSQR4m6zdQiJwxJ89K8iTmWl4hvUQ$ 
>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2024-11-14 19:51 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-11-13 18:03 [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Add lag based placement Joseph Salisbury
2024-11-13 18:19 ` Phil Auld
2024-11-13 18:22   ` [External] : " Joseph Salisbury
2024-11-13 18:33     ` Joseph Salisbury
2024-11-14 19:50       ` [External] : " Joseph Salisbury

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox