From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A27ECDFB1 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:03:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F23220C10 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:03:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3F23220C10 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=techsingularity.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729755AbeGQKfW (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:35:22 -0400 Received: from outbound-smtp08.blacknight.com ([46.22.139.13]:48256 "EHLO outbound-smtp08.blacknight.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729719AbeGQKfW (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2018 06:35:22 -0400 Received: from mail.blacknight.com (pemlinmail03.blacknight.ie [81.17.254.16]) by outbound-smtp08.blacknight.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D11EA1C24B3 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:03:30 +0100 (IST) Received: (qmail 21430 invoked from network); 17 Jul 2018 10:03:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO techsingularity.net) (mgorman@techsingularity.net@[37.228.237.66]) by 81.17.254.9 with ESMTPSA (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted, authenticated); 17 Jul 2018 10:03:30 -0000 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 11:03:30 +0100 From: Mel Gorman To: Jirka Hladky Cc: Kamil Kolakowski , Jakub Racek , linux-kernel , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [4.17 regression] Performance drop on kernel-4.17 visible on Stream, Linpack and NAS parallel benchmarks Message-ID: <20180717100329.yfy7igdsrpk5ujf4@techsingularity.net> References: <20180621092331.p2pmaiu6563kp5u2@techsingularity.net> <20180627084954.73ucqvac62v5gje4@techsingularity.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170912 (1.9.0) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 10:45:51AM +0200, Jirka Hladky wrote: > Hi Mel, > > we have compared 4.18 + git:// > git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mel/linux.git > sched-numa-fast-crossnode-v1r12 against 4.16 kernel and performance results > look very good! > Excellent, thanks to both Kamil and yourself for collecting the data. It's helpful to have independent verification. > We see performance gains about 10-20% for SPECjbb2005. NAS results are a > little bit noisy but show overall performance gains as well (total runtime > for reduced from 6 hours 34 minutes to 6 hours 26 minutes to give you a > specific example). Great. > The only benchmark showing a slight regression is stream > - but the regression is just a few percents ( upto 10%) and I think it's > not a real concern given that it's an artificial benchmark. > Agreed. > How is your testing going? Do you think > that sched-numa-fast-crossnode-v1r12 series can make it into the 4.18? > My own testing completed and the results are within expectations and I saw no red flags. Unfortunately, I consider it unlikely they'll be merged for 4.18. Srikar Dronamraju's series is likely to need another update and I would need to rebase my patches on top of that. Given the scope and complexity, I find it unlikely they would be accepted for an -rc, particularly this late of an rc. Whether we hit the 4.19 merge window or not will depend on when Srikar's series gets updated. > Thanks a lot for your efforts to improve the performance! My pleasure. -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs