From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@intel.com>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hp.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@hp.com>,
Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@hp.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 02:02:39 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140807180239.GC2480@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1407349295.2384.14.camel@j-VirtualBox>
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 11:21:35AM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> I ran these tests with most of the AIM7 workloads to compare its
> performance between a 3.16 kernel and the kernel with these patches
> applied.
>
> The table below contains the percent difference between the baseline
> kernel and the kernel with the patches at various user counts. A
> positive percent means the kernel with the patches performed better,
> while a negative percent means the baseline performed better.
>
> Based on these numbers, for many of the workloads, the change was
> beneficial in those highly contended, while it had - impact in many
> of the lightly/moderately contended case (10 to 90 users).
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> | 10-90 | 100-1000 | 1100-2000
> | users | users | users
> -----------------------------------------------------
> alltests | -3.37% | -10.64% | -2.25%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> all_utime | +0.33% | +3.73% | +3.33%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> compute | -5.97% | +2.34% | +3.22%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> custom | -31.61% | -10.29% | +15.23%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> disk | +24.64% | +28.96% | +21.28%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> fserver | -1.35% | +4.82% | +9.35%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> high_systime | -6.73% | -6.28% | +12.36%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> shared | -28.31% | -19.99% | -7.10%
> -----------------------------------------------------
> short | -44.63% | -37.48% | -33.62%
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
Thanks, Jason. Sorry for late response.
What about the variation of the tests? The machine you test on?
Yuyang
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-08 2:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-04 20:28 [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load Jason Low
2014-08-04 19:15 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-04 21:42 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-05 15:42 ` Jason Low
2014-08-06 18:21 ` Jason Low
2014-08-07 18:02 ` Yuyang Du [this message]
2014-08-08 4:18 ` Jason Low
2014-08-07 22:30 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-08 7:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-07 23:15 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-08 0:02 ` Yuyang Du
2014-08-04 20:52 ` bsegall
2014-08-04 21:27 ` Jason Low
2014-08-11 17:31 ` Jason Low
2014-08-04 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-05 17:53 ` Waiman Long
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=20140807180239.GC2480@intel.com \
--to=yuyang.du@intel.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).