public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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