public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Duc Vianney <dvianney@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Hyperthreading performance on 2.4.19 and 2.5.32
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 15:03:28 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D878A90.F5E4B8B0@us.ibm.com> (raw)

The following are data comparing the effects of hyperthreading (HT)on
stock kernel 2.4.19 and 2.5.32.
Hardware under test. The hardware is a Xeon 1-CPU MP, 1.6 gigahertz,
and 2.5 GB RAM.
Kernel under test. When testing under 2.4.19, the kernel was built
as an SMP kernel, and was run on the hardware with HT enabled through
the boot option 'noht'. When testing under 2.5.32, the kernel was
built as an SMP kernel, and was run on the hardware with HT enabled
through selecting ACPI in configuration.
Benchmarks. For multithreaded benchmarks: chat, dbench and tbench.
Summary of results. The results on Linux kernel 2.4.19 show HT might
improve multithreaded application by as much as 30%. On kernel 2.5.32,
HT may provide speed-up as high as 60%.
Observations. There are two major differences between 2.4.19 and
2.5.32 which could affect HT performance: O(1)scheduler and Ingo's
shared runqueue patch for HT that went in 2.5.32. However, Ingo's HT
patch is for handling load balancing, affinity, and task pickup. Those
are problems that exist in systems with >= 2CPUs. Since I have only
1-CPU in my test, I think the O(1) scheduler has had greater impact
than the runqueue patch. On 2.5.32, the chat workload seems to benefit
the most, followed by tbench and dbench.
The data for each number of chat rooms run (e.g., 20) represents the
geometric mean of five runs. Same method was also used for each number
of clients run in dbench and tbench.

chat workload     2.4.19     2.5.32
No. chat rooms   Speed-up   Speed-up
     20            24%        51%
     30            22%        41%
     40            22%        60%
     50            28%        39%
Geometric Mean     24%        45%

dbench workload   2.4.19     2.5.32
No.clients       Speed-up   Speed-up
     20            29%        27%
     30            29%         9%
     60            12%         1%
     90             9%         4%
    120            16%        23%
Geometric Mean     18%        12%

tbench workload   2.4.19     2.5.32
No.clients       Speed-up   Speed-up
     20            31%        36%
     30            30%        36%
     60            26%        36%
     90            22%        35%
    120            27%        33%
Geometric Mean     27%        35%

Duc Vianney - dvianney@us.ibm.com


             reply	other threads:[~2002-09-17 19:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-09-17 20:03 Duc Vianney [this message]
2002-09-17 20:05 ` [Lse-tech] Hyperthreading performance on 2.4.19 and 2.5.32 Martin J. Bligh
2002-09-17 20:35 ` Randy.Dunlap

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=3D878A90.F5E4B8B0@us.ibm.com \
    --to=dvianney@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.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