From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org,
ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, fengwei.yin@intel.com,
aubrey.li@linux.intel.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] [sched/fair] d329605287: stress-ng.resched.ops_per_sec -24.0% regression
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 13:59:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240710115932.GZ27299@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202407101139.6e513af5-oliver.sang@intel.com>
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 12:51:44PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> kernel test robot noticed a -24.0% regression of stress-ng.resched.ops_per_sec on:
>
>
> commit: d329605287020c3d1c3b0dadc63d8208e7251382 ("sched/fair: set_load_weight() must also call reweight_task() for SCHED_IDLE tasks")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core
>
> testcase: stress-ng
> test machine: 64 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6346 CPU @ 3.10GHz (Ice Lake) with 256G memory
> parameters:
>
> nr_threads: 100%
> testtime: 60s
> test: resched
> cpufreq_governor: performance
Well.... if I read the test source correctly, this seems to test how
fast it can call sched_setscheduler(), rather than test how fast we can
schedule.
And that patch mentioned above makes setting SCHED_IDLE more expensve --
as expensive as SCHED_OTHER and SCHED_BATCH.
I'm thinking this test is rather stupid and doesn't actually measure
anything useful, I don't think I consider sched_setscheduler() a fast
path by any means.
Su yeah, *shrug*.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-10 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-10 4:51 [tip:sched/core] [sched/fair] d329605287: stress-ng.resched.ops_per_sec -24.0% regression kernel test robot
2024-07-10 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=20240710115932.GZ27299@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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