From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>,
Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 18:34:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180212173449.GA25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180212171131.26139-3-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 05:11:31PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> However, the benefit in other cases is large. This is the result for NAS
> with the D class sizing on a 4-socket machine
>
> 4.15.0 4.15.0
> sdnuma-v1r23 delayretry-v1r23
> Time cg.D 557.00 ( 0.00%) 431.82 ( 22.47%)
> Time ep.D 77.83 ( 0.00%) 79.01 ( -1.52%)
> Time is.D 26.46 ( 0.00%) 26.64 ( -0.68%)
> Time lu.D 727.14 ( 0.00%) 597.94 ( 17.77%)
> Time mg.D 191.35 ( 0.00%) 146.85 ( 23.26%)
Last time I checked, we were some ~25% from OMP_PROC_BIND with NAS, this
seems to close that hole significantly. Do you happen to have
OMP_PROC_BIND numbers handy to see how far away we are from manual
affinity?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-12 17:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-12 17:11 [PATCH 0/2] Stop wake_affine fighting with automatic NUMA balancing Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:11 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Consider SD_NUMA when selecting the most idle group to schedule on Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 11:35 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-13 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-13 13:29 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/numa: Delay retrying placement for automatic NUMA balance after wake_affine Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:34 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2018-02-12 17:52 ` Mel Gorman
2018-02-12 17:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-02-12 18:11 ` Mel Gorman
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=20180212173449.GA25201@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
/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