From: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Aishwarya TCV <Aishwarya.TCV@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] sched/fair: Reimplement NEXT_BUDDY to align with EEVDF goals
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2026 16:52:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <756efd17-682f-4ffc-b8d9-dbb2517bc152@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a33dc104-cfd3-4c29-976b-ea370f45e24d@arm.com>
On 02.01.26 13:38, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> Hi, I appreciate I sent this report just before Xmas so most likely you haven't
> had a chance to look, but wanted to bring it back to the top of your mailbox in
> case it was missed.
>
> Happy new year!
>
> Thanks,
> Ryan
>
> On 22/12/2025 10:57, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> Hi Mel, Peter,
>>
>> We are building out a kernel performance regression monitoring lab at Arm, and
>> I've noticed some fairly large perofrmance regressions in real-world workloads,
>> for which bisection has fingered this patch.
>>
>> We are looking at performance changes between v6.18 and v6.19-rc1, and by
>> reverting this patch on top of v6.19-rc1 many regressions are resolved. (We plan
>> to move the testing to linux-next over the next couple of quarters so hopefully
>> we will be able to deliver this sort of news prior to merging in future).
>>
>> All testing is done on AWS Graviton3 (arm64) bare metal systems. (R)/(I) mean
>> statistically significant regression/improvement, where "statistically
>> significant" means the 95% confidence intervals do not overlap".
You mentioned that you reverted this patch 'patch 2/2 'sched/fair:
Reimplement NEXT_BUDDY to align with EEVDF goals'.
Does this mean NEXT_BUDDY is still enabled, i.e. you haven't reverted
patch 1/2 'sched/fair: Enable scheduler feature NEXT_BUDDY' as well?
---
Mel mentioned that he tested on a 2-socket machine. So I guess something
like my Intel Xeon Silver 4314:
cpu0 0 0
domain0 SMT 00000001,00000001
domain1 MC 55555555,55555555
domain2 NUMA ffffffff,ffffffff
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 20
1: 20 10
Whereas I assume the Graviton3 has 64 CPUs (cores) flat in a single MC
domain? I guess topology has influence in benchmark numbers here as well.
---
There was also a lot of improvement on schbench (wakeup latency) on
higher percentiles (>= 99.0th) on the 2-socket machine with those 2
patches. I guess you haven't seen those on Grav3?
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-02 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-12 12:25 [PATCH 0/2 v5] Reintroduce NEXT_BUDDY for EEVDF Mel Gorman
2025-11-12 12:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] sched/fair: Enable scheduler feature NEXT_BUDDY Mel Gorman
2025-11-14 12:19 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Mel Gorman
2025-11-17 16:23 ` tip-bot2 for Mel Gorman
[not found] ` <20251112122521.1331238-3-mgorman@techsingularity.net>
2025-11-12 14:48 ` [PATCH 2/2] sched/fair: Reimplement NEXT_BUDDY to align with EEVDF goals Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-13 8:26 ` Madadi Vineeth Reddy
2025-11-13 9:04 ` Mel Gorman
2025-11-14 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-11-14 12:19 ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Mel Gorman
2025-11-17 16:23 ` tip-bot2 for Mel Gorman
2025-12-22 10:57 ` [REGRESSION] " Ryan Roberts
2026-01-02 12:38 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-02 15:52 ` Dietmar Eggemann [this message]
2026-01-05 11:45 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-05 14:38 ` Shrikanth Hegde
2026-01-05 16:33 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-07 15:30 ` Dietmar Eggemann
2026-01-08 8:50 ` Mel Gorman
2026-01-08 13:15 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-09 10:15 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-12 7:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-12 8:52 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-12 9:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-01-12 10:27 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-01-13 6:31 ` K Prateek Nayak
2026-01-15 10:16 ` Mel Gorman
2026-01-08 10:01 ` [REGRESSION] [PATCH 0/2 v5] Reintroduce NEXT_BUDDY for EEVDF Madadi Vineeth Reddy
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=756efd17-682f-4ffc-b8d9-dbb2517bc152@arm.com \
--to=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=Aishwarya.TCV@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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