From: Jie Chen <chen@jlab.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Simon Holm Th??gersen <odie@cs.aau.dk>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above, 2.6.24-rc4
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:22:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4756D058.1070500@jlab.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071205154014.GA6491@elte.hu>
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jie Chen <chen@jlab.org> wrote:
>
>> I just ran the same test on two 2.6.24-rc4 kernels: one with
>> CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED on and the other with CONFIG_FAIR_GROUP_SCHED
>> off. The odd behavior I described in my previous e-mails were still
>> there for both kernels. Let me know If I can be any more help. Thank
>> you.
>
> ok, i had a look at your data, and i think this is the result of the
> scheduler balancing out to idle CPUs more agressively than before. Doing
> that is almost always a good idea though - but indeed it can result in
> "bad" numbers if all you do is to measure the ping-pong "performance"
> between two threads. (with no real work done by any of them).
>
My test code are not doing much work but measuring overhead of various
synchronization mechanisms such as barrier and lock. I am trying to see
the scalability of different implementations/algorithms on multi-core
machines.
> the moment you saturate the system a bit more, the numbers should
> improve even with such a ping-pong test.
>
You are right. If I manually do load balance (bind unrelated processes
on the other cores), my test code perform as well as it did in the
kernel 2.6.21.
> do you have testcode (or a modification of your testcase sourcecode)
> that simulates a real-life situation where 2.6.24-rc4 performs not as
> well as you'd like it to see? (or if qmt.tar.gz already contains that
> then please point me towards that portion of the test and how i should
> run it - thanks!)
The qmt.tar.gz code contains a simple test program call pthread_sync
under the src directory. You can change the number of threads by setting
QMT_NUM_THREADS environment variable. You can build the qmt by doing
configure --enable-public-release. I do not have Intel quad core
machines, I am not sure whether the behavior will show up on Intel
platform. Our cluster is dual quad-core opteron which has its own
hardware problem :-).
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/04/237248&from=rss
>
> Ingo
Hi, Ingo:
My test code qmt can be found at ftp://ftp.jlab.org/pub/hpc/qmt.tar.gz.
There is a minor performance issue in qmt pointed out by Eric, which I
have not put into the tar ball yet. If I can be any help, please let me
know. Thank you very much.
--
###############################################
Jie Chen
Scientific Computing Group
Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility
12000, Jefferson Ave.
Newport News, VA 23606
(757)269-5046 (office) (757)269-6248 (fax)
chen@jlab.org
###############################################
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-05 16:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-11-21 20:34 Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above Jie Chen
2007-11-21 22:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-11-22 1:52 ` Jie Chen
2007-11-22 2:32 ` Simon Holm Thøgersen
2007-11-22 2:58 ` Jie Chen
2007-11-22 20:19 ` Matt Mackall
2007-12-04 13:17 ` Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above, 2.6.24-rc4 Ingo Molnar
2007-12-04 15:41 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-05 15:29 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-05 15:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 16:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-05 16:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 16:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2007-12-05 16:22 ` Jie Chen [this message]
2007-12-05 16:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 17:47 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-05 20:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 20:23 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-05 20:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 20:52 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-05 21:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-05 22:16 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-06 10:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-06 16:29 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-10 10:59 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-10 20:04 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-11 10:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-11 15:28 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-11 15:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-11 16:39 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-11 21:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-12-11 22:11 ` Jie Chen
2007-12-12 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-05 20:36 ` Possible bug from kernel 2.6.22 and above Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-05 20:53 ` Jie Chen
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=4756D058.1070500@jlab.org \
--to=chen@jlab.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=odie@cs.aau.dk \
/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