public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	alex.shi@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: UDP-U stream performance regression on 32-rc1 kernel
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 09:10:57 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1257408657.29794.9.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257407063.16282.89.camel@ymzhang>

On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 15:44 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 06:20 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-11-05 at 10:20 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 13:07 +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > 
> > > > Can you try the below, and send me 
> > > I tested it on Nehalem machine against the latest tips kernel. netperf loopback
> > > result is good and regression disappears.
> > 
> > Excellent.  Ingo has picked up a version in tip (1b9508f) which has zero
> > negative effect on my x264 testcase, and is a win for mysql+oltp through
> > the whole test spectrum.  As that may (dunno, Ingo?) now be considered a
> > regression fix, ie candidate for 32.final, testing that it does no harm
> > to your big machines would be a good thing.  (pretty please?:)
> I tested the latest tips kernel which includes commit 1b9508f.
> Comparing with 2.6.31, netperf loopback UDP-U-4k has about 2% regression.

Ok, thanks for testing.  That could well be a1f84a3, that needs a bit of
fiddling.

> sysbench(oltp)+mysql result is pretty good, about 2% improvement than
> 2.6.31's.

Cool, a progression for a change :)
 
> > > tbench result has no improvement.
> > 
> > Can you remind me where we stand on tbench?
> I run tbench by starting CPU_NUM*2 tbench clients without cpu binding.
> Comparing with 2.6.31, tbench has about 6% regression with 2.6.31-rc1 on Nehalem.
> Mostly, it's caused by SD_PREFER_LOCAL and Peter already disables the flag for
> MC and cpu domains. Your patch disables it for node domain.
> With the current tips kernel, tbench has about 3% regression on 1 nahalem, and
> less than 1% on another Nehalem.

Ok, we're not looking too bad, but still something there to go after.

> With pure 2.6.32-rc6 kernel, tbench result has about 3~6% regression on Nehalem
> , comparing with 2.6.32-rc5's. So some patches in tips haven't been merged into
> upstream.
 
> > > > your UDP-U-1k args so I can try it? 
> > > #taskset -c 0 ./netserver
> > > #taskset -c 15 ./netperf -t UDP_STREAM -l 60 -H 127.0.0.1 -i 50 3 -I 99 5 -- -P 12384,12888 -s 32768 -S 32768 -m 4096
> > > 
> > > Pls. check /proc/cpuinfo to make sure cpu 0 and cpu 15 are not in the
> > > same physical cpu.
> > 
> > Thanks. My little box doesn't have a 15 (darn) so 0,3 will have to do.
> Sorry. I copy it from the output of "ps -ef", so a couple of ',' are lost. The right netperf command
> line is:
> #taskset -c 15 ./netperf -t UDP_STREAM -l 60 -H 127.0.0.1 -i 50,3 -I 99,5 -- -P 12384,12888 -s 32768 -S 32768 -m 4096

Thanks.  (-i and -I have always given me trouble on my little boxen. I
usually just let it do it's thing without them, and repeat a lot;)

	-Mike


      reply	other threads:[~2009-11-05  8:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-03  3:47 UDP-U stream performance regression on 32-rc1 kernel Alex Shi
2009-11-03  4:33 ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-11-03  9:09   ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-03 17:45   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-04  1:55     ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-11-04 12:07       ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-05  2:20         ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-11-05  5:20           ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-05  7:03             ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-05  8:57               ` Mike Galbraith
2009-11-05  7:44             ` Zhang, Yanmin
2009-11-05  8:10               ` Mike Galbraith [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=1257408657.29794.9.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=alex.shi@intel.com \
    --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