From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Wei Yang <richardw.yang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] [driver core] 570d020012: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -12.2% regression
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:19:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190219121904.GA24103@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190219005945.GA16734@richard>
On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 08:59:45AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 03:54:42PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> >Greeting,
> >
> >FYI, we noticed a -12.2% regression of will-it-scale.per_thread_ops due to commit:
> >
> >
> >commit: 570d0200123fb4f809aa2f6226e93a458d664d70 ("driver core: move device->knode_class to device_private")
> >https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> >
>
> This is interesting.
>
> I didn't expect the move of this field will impact the performance.
>
> The reason is struct device is a hotter memory than device->device_private?
>
> >in testcase: will-it-scale
> >on test machine: 288 threads Knights Mill with 80G memory
> >with following parameters:
> >
> > nr_task: 100%
> > mode: thread
> > test: unlink2
> > cpufreq_governor: performance
> >
> >test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> >test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
> >
> >In addition to that, the commit also has significant impact on the following tests:
> >
> >+------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
> >| testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -29.9% regression |
> >| test machine | 288 threads Knights Mill with 80G memory |
> >| test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance |
> >| | mode=thread |
> >| | nr_task=100% |
> >| | test=signal1 |
Ok, I'm going to blame your testing system, or something here, and not
the above patch.
All this test does is call raise(3). That does not touch the driver
core at all.
> >+------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
> >| testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -16.5% regression |
> >| test machine | 288 threads Knights Mill with 80G memory |
> >| test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance |
> >| | mode=thread |
> >| | nr_task=100% |
> >| | test=open1 |
> >+------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Same here, open1 just calls open/close a lot. No driver core
interaction at all there either.
So are you _sure_ this is the offending patch?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-19 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-18 7:54 [LKP] [driver core] 570d020012: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -12.2% regression kernel test robot
[not found] ` <20190219005945.GA16734@richard>
2019-02-19 12:19 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2019-02-21 3:10 ` kernel test robot
2019-02-21 3:46 ` Wei Yang
2019-02-21 4:46 ` Huang, Ying
2019-02-21 6:02 ` Wei Yang
2019-02-21 6:29 ` Huang, Ying
2019-02-21 5:46 ` kernel test robot
2019-02-21 7:10 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-02-21 7:18 ` Huang, Ying
2019-02-21 7:35 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-02-21 8:30 ` Huang, Ying
[not found] ` <20190221083926.GA7834@richard>
2019-02-21 9:12 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2019-02-21 21:40 ` Wei Yang
2019-02-21 7:53 ` Wei Yang
2019-02-21 22:31 ` Wei Yang
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=20190219121904.GA24103@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=richardw.yang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=rong.a.chen@intel.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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