From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
lkp@01.org, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:00:12 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603210841260.3978@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87io0gh78w.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 3162 bytes --]
On Mon, 21 Mar 2016, Huang, Ying wrote:
> > FYI, we noticed 25.6% performance improvement due to commit
> >
> > 65d8fc777f6d "futex: Remove requirement for lock_page() in get_futex_key()"
> >
> > in the will-it-scale.per_process_ops test.
> >
> > will-it-scale.per_process_ops tests the futex operations for process shared
> > futexes (Or whatever that test really does).
>
> There is a futex sub test case for will-it-scale test suite. But I got your
> point, we need some description for the test case. If email is not too
> limited for the full description, we will put it in some web site and
> include short description and link to the full description in email.
Ok. Just make sure the short description gives enough information for the
casual reader.
> > The commit has no significant impact on any other test in the test suite.
>
> Sorry, we have no enough machine power to test all test cases for each
> bisect result. So we will have no such information until we find a way
> to do that.
Well, then I really have to ask how I should interpret the data here:
5076304 ± 0% +25.6% 6374220 ± 0% will-it-scale.per_process_ops
^^^ That's the reason why you sent the mail in the first place
1194117 ± 0% +14.4% 1366153 ± 1% will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
0.58 ± 0% -2.0% 0.57 ± 0% will-it-scale.scalability
6820 ± 0% -19.6% 5483 ± 15% meminfo.AnonHugePages
2652 ± 5% -10.4% 2375 ± 2% vmstat.system.cs
2848 ± 32% +141.2% 6870 ± 65% numa-meminfo.node1.Active(anon)
2832 ± 31% +57.6% 4465 ± 27% numa-meminfo.node1.AnonPages
15018 ± 12% -23.3% 11515 ± 15% numa-meminfo.node2.AnonPages
1214 ± 14% -22.8% 936.75 ± 20% numa-meminfo.node3.PageTables
712.25 ± 32% +141.2% 1718 ± 65% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_active_anon
708.25 ± 31% +57.7% 1116 ± 27% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_anon_pages
How is this related and what should I do about this information?
If it's important then I have to admit, that I fail to understand why.
If it's not important then I have to ask why is this included.
> > So that allows me to reproduce that test more or less with no effort. And
> > that's the really important part.
>
> For reproducing, now we use lkp-tests tool, which includes scripts to
> build the test case, run the test, collect various information, compare
> the test result, with the job file attached with the report email. That
> is not the easiest way, we will continuously improve it.
I know and lkp-tests is a pain to work with. So please look into a way to
extract the relevant binaries, so it's simple for developers to reproduce.
> > You can provide nice charts and full comparison tables for all tests on a web
> > site for those who are interested in large stats and pretty charts.
> >
> > Full results: http://wherever.you.store/your/results/test-nr/results
>
> Before we have a website for detailed information, we will still put
> some details into report email.
Ok, but please make them understandable for mere mortals.
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-21 8:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-29 8:36 [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops kernel test robot
2016-02-29 9:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-29 17:37 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2016-03-01 8:38 ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2016-03-18 6:12 ` Huang, Ying
2016-03-18 8:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2016-03-21 2:53 ` Huang, Ying
2016-03-21 8:00 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2016-03-21 8:42 ` Huang, Ying
2016-03-28 17:14 ` Darren Hart
2016-03-29 1:12 ` Huang, Ying
2016-03-29 5:17 ` Darren Hart
2016-03-29 5:57 ` Huang, Ying
2016-03-29 7:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=alpine.DEB.2.11.1603210841260.3978@nanos \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@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