From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:08:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1255432104.7101.33.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1255426740.9958.95.camel@marge.simson.net>
On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 11:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-10-13 at 11:12 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
>
> > NEXT_BUDDY has no help on volanoMark and tbench.
>
> Vmark is mostly about preemption and affinity. Increases in wakeup
> preemption or load balancing will bring it down. The affinity bit
> applies heavily to mysql+oltp too, though it loves wakeup preemption.
>
> test test test...
>
> My conclusion for results _here_ is load balancing changes are harming
> cache wise. GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS harms short term fairness, but despite
> GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS, we're still wakeup preempting too much, likely
> doing more cache harm.
>
> (even for the desktop, overly aggressive wakeup preemption can do harm)
>
> I'd suggest trying the settings below.
Except don't bother tweaking min_granularity. Further testing showed
that's fine. So turn off GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS, and bump
wakeup_granularity up a bit.
Note: don't bump it further than the short term fairness goal
(sched_latency, or half of that if gentle is enabled), or you won't have
any wakeup preemption, which is deadly for many loads.
> vmark
>
> 92143 stock settings
> 96396 -SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE
> 99403 -SD_WAKE_BALANCE
> 121821 min_granularity+wakeup_granularity *= 2
> 128795 NO_WAKEUP_PREEMPT (and back on, just checking fairness)
> 97193 NO_FAIR_SLEEPERS (vmark likes fairness, max out fairness)
> 107519 FAIR_SLEEPERS NO_GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS (over-preempt again, so..)
> 123721 min_granularity+wakeup_granularity *= 2
> 131290 NO_WAKEUP_PREEMPT (and back on, just checking fairness)
> 123464 NEXT_BUDDY (no effect)
> vs stock 1.339
>
> tbench 8 with these settings.
>
> 752.249 MB/sec 8 procs
> 747.010 MB/sec 8 procs NO_NEXT_BUDDY
> 753.177 MB/sec 8 procs min_granularity+wakeup_granularity /= 2
> 749.518 MB/sec 8 procs GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS
> 753.051 MB/sec 8 procs min_granularity+wakeup_granularity /= 2
> 734.772 MB/sec 8 procs +SD_WAKE_BALANCE
> 733.683 MB/sec 8 procs +SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE (we are at stock)
> vs stock 1.025
>
> Turns off netfilter, stock settings
>
> 903.304 MB/sec 8 procs
> 900.656 MB/sec 8 procs -SD_BALANCE_NEWIDLE
> 928.914 MB/sec 8 procs -SD_WAKE_BALANCE
> 930.591 MB/sec 8 procs min_granularity+wakeup_granularity *= 2
> 926.836 MB/sec 8 procs NO_GENTLE_FAIR_SLEEPERS
> 931.148 MB/sec 8 procs min_granularity+wakeup_granularity *= 2
> vs stock 1.030
>
> vmark
>
> 146264
> 116559 stock
> vs stock 1.254
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-13 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-09 9:19 hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1 Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-09 10:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-12 7:05 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-12 8:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-12 14:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-12 14:33 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-13 3:12 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-13 9:39 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-13 11:08 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-10-16 11:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-27 8:03 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-27 14:42 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-28 9:29 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-28 14:22 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-29 0:50 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-29 5:46 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-10-29 6:26 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-29 9:14 ` [patch] " Mike Galbraith
2009-10-30 2:02 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-10-14 13:13 ` [tip:sched/urgent] sched: Do less agressive buddy clearing tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
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=1255432104.7101.33.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox