From: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com>, "Mel Gorman" <mgorman@suse.de>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leobras@redhat.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@toblux.com>,
Zqiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@inria.fr>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Idle Load Balance fixes and softirq enhancements
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 19:19:53 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fdce27c2-ecf0-6c89-a372-3f93ce99ca61@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240904111223.1035-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
On 9/4/2024 4:42 PM, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello folks,
>
> [..snip..]
>
> Chenyu had reported a regression when running a modified version of
> ipistorm that performs a fixed set of IPIs between two CPUs on his
> setup with the whole v1 applied. I've benchmarked this series on both an
> AMD and an Intel system to catch any significant regression early.
> Following are the numbers from a dual socket Intel Ice Lake Xeon server
> (2 x 32C/64T) and 3rd Generation AMD EPYC system (2 x 64C/128T) running
> ipistorm between CPU8 and CPU16 (unless stated otherwise with *):
>
> base: tip/master at commit 5566819aeba0 ("Merge branch into tip/master:
> 'x86/timers'") based on v6.11-rc6 + Patch from [1]
So that should have been the SM_IDLE fast path patch in [3]
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240809092240.6921-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com/
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : ipistorm (modified)
> Units : % improvement over base kernel
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> ======================= Intel Ice Lake Xeon ======================
> kernel: [pct imp]
> performance gov, boost on -3%
> powersave gov, boost on -2%
> performance gov, boost off -3%
> performance gov, boost off, cross node * -3%
> ==================== 3rd Generation AMD EPYC =====================
> kernel: [pct imp]
> performance gov, boost on, !PREEMPT_RT 36%
> performance gov, boost on, PREEMPT_RT 54%
> ==================================================================
PREEMPT_RT kernel is based on:
git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rt/linux-rt-devel.git linux-6.11.y-rt-rebase
at commit 01ab72c93f63 ("Add localversion for -RT release") with the
addition of commit e68ac2b48849 ("softirq: Remove unused 'action'
parameter from action callback") from tip:irq/core and the SM_IDLE
fast-path patch from [3].
>
> * cross node setup used CPU 16 on Node 0 and CPU 17 on Node 1 on the
> dual socket Intel Ice Lake Xeon system.
>
> Improvements on PREEMPT_RT can perhaps be attributed to cacheline
> aligning the per-cpu softirq_ctrl variable.
>
> This series has been marked RFC since this is my first attempt at
> dealing with PREEMPT_RT nuances. Any and all feedback is appreciated.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240710090210.41856-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/fcf823f-195e-6c9a-eac3-25f870cb35ac@inria.fr/
> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240809092240.6921-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com/
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/225e6d74-ed43-51dd-d1aa-c75c86dd58eb@amd.com/
> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240710150557.GB27299@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net/
> ---
> [..snip..]
>
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-04 13:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-04 11:12 [RFC PATCH v2 0/5] Idle Load Balance fixes and softirq enhancements K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] softirq: Allow raising SCHED_SOFTIRQ from SMP-call-function on RT kernel K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] sched/core: Remove the unnecessary need_resched() check in nohz_csd_func() K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/5] softirq: Mask reads of softirq_ctrl.cnt with SOFTIRQ_MASK for PREEMPT_RT K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/5] softirq: Unify should_wakeup_ksoftirqd() K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 12:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-09-04 13:40 ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 11:12 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/5] softirq: Avoid unnecessary wakeup of ksoftirqd when a call to do_sofirq() is pending K Prateek Nayak
2024-09-04 13:49 ` K Prateek Nayak [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=fdce27c2-ecf0-6c89-a372-3f93ce99ca61@amd.com \
--to=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=Julia.Lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=bsegall@google.com \
--cc=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
--cc=leobras@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thorsten.blum@toblux.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.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