From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.jf.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Vaidyanathan Srinivasan <svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Yanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.jf.intel.com>,
Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v2 1/2] sched: check for prev_cpu == this_cpu before calling wake_affine()
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 07:17:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1271308641.14779.14.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1271277923.2875.35.camel@sbs-t61.sc.intel.com>
On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 13:45 -0700, Suresh Siddha wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 23:20 -0700, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > Do you have a compute load bouncing painfully which this patch cures?
> >
> > I have no strong objections, and the result is certainly easier on the
> > eye. If I were making the decision, I'd want to see some numbers.
>
> Mike, PeterZ,
>
> Finally got sometime to get back to this and provide some data backing
> up my patch under discussion. Here are my test results:
>
> System is a two socket quad-core NHM-EP with SMT enabled and the
> workload is specjbb2005.
>
> Warehouses Throughput
> tip tip+proposed-fix
> 1 35142 35027
> 2 73563 75977
> 3 105806 109836
> 4 133421 142490
> 5 152151 168888
> 6 164936 195392
> 7 184763 208155
> 8 192419 223846
>
> PeterZ, I think the above clearly shows that we have a problem with the
> current -tip code. Please consider the proposed patch (which can be
> found at http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=127007936408754&w=2)
>
> Mike, with the above data, can I have your Ack for the patch?
Sure (not that you need it). A bit of abbreviated testing this morning
showed no big hairy differences. A bit of loss to very fast switchers,
but OTOH it improved ramp a bit for mysql/pgsql+oltp.
tip = v2.6.34-rc4-937-gba0b2c9
tip-x = tip + your patches
netperf TCP_RR
unpinned
tip 102877.39 102860.66 103210.25 avg 102982.76 1.000
tip-x 100926.59 100380.26 100536.35 avg 100614.40 .977
pinned
tip 100181.70 100288.34 99711.16 avg 100060.40 1.000
tip-x 99347.12 100551.80 99827.22 avg 99908.71 .998
tbench 8
tip 1195.51 1194.49 1197.46 avg 1195.82 1.000
tip-x 1183.19 1188.00 1188.13 avg 1186.44 .992
mysql+oltp
clients 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256
tip 10424.24 20417.42 37151.84 36777.79 36442.06 36122.14 33803.15 30109.81 28368.75
11196.80 20443.43 37560.39 37358.14 36822.26 36132.95 34411.88 30349.47 28909.04
11204.02 20513.21 37550.11 37219.52 36840.44 36150.47 34445.02 30975.95 28840.59
tip avg 10941.68 20458.02 37420.78 37118.48 36701.58 36135.18 34220.01 30478.41 28706.12
tip-x 10331.62 20981.89 36768.45 36556.19 36069.56 35612.24 34100.70 30459.80 29043.76
11101.77 21153.77 37622.83 37228.68 36845.37 36256.04 34606.37 31287.36 28635.98
11076.66 21153.41 37703.80 37242.89 36842.93 36296.27 34733.06 30578.00 29313.10
tip-x avg 10836.68 21096.35 37365.02 37009.25 36585.95 36054.85 34480.04 30775.05 28997.61
vs tip .990 1.031 .998 .997 .996 .997 1.007 1.009 1.010
pgsql+oltp
clients 1 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256
tip 14683.30 30452.18 53826.68 53793.77 52931.67 51959.47 51326.82 49205.13 46884.50
16154.17 30811.46 54277.20 53916.07 52792.89 52031.80 50967.99 48757.04 46259.84
16151.36 29913.89 54071.21 53499.94 52707.50 51867.73 50887.40 49310.96 46544.42
tip avg 15662.94 30392.51 54058.36 53736.59 52810.68 51953.00 51060.73 49091.04 46562.92
tip-x 14641.30 31402.11 54267.43 53835.83 53024.57 51992.08 50336.10 49083.58 46662.24
16167.44 31427.53 54008.47 53685.56 52709.81 52131.85 50848.08 48824.32 45973.29
16259.76 31381.42 54327.51 53791.91 52857.70 51912.42 50941.33 49028.19 45938.22
tip-x avg 15689.50 31403.68 54201.13 53771.10 52864.02 52012.11 50708.50 48978.69 46191.25
vs tip 1.001 1.033 1.002 1.000 1.001 1.001 .993 .997 .992
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-15 5:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-08 22:19 [patch v2 1/2] sched: check for prev_cpu == this_cpu before calling wake_affine() Suresh Siddha
2010-03-08 22:19 ` [patch v2 2/2] sched: fix select_idle_sibling() logic in select_task_rq_fair() Suresh Siddha
2010-03-31 10:25 ` [patch v2 1/2] sched: check for prev_cpu == this_cpu before calling wake_affine() Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-31 23:47 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-01 5:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-01 21:04 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-02 6:20 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-02 17:05 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-02 19:43 ` Mike Galbraith
2010-04-14 20:45 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-15 5:17 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2010-04-20 8:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-20 8:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-20 17:03 ` Suresh Siddha
2010-04-23 10:50 ` [tip:sched/core] sched: Fix select_idle_sibling() logic in select_task_rq_fair() tip-bot for Suresh Siddha
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=1271308641.14779.14.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=arjan@linux.jf.intel.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=suresh.b.siddha@intel.com \
--cc=svaidy@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.jf.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