From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Cc: athorlton@sgi.com, riel@redhat.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Idle power fix regresses ebizzy performance (was 3.12-stable backport of NUMA balancing patches)
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 19:24:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140113192406.GL27046@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140108134858.GF27046@suse.de>
On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 01:48:58PM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> Adding LKML to the list as this -stable snifftest has identified an
> upstream regression.
>
This is a false alarm.
The test machine in question was originally installed based on a beta
version of openSUSE 13.1. It included a package by default that set default
malloc parameters that I was not aware. Normally the package is there to
catch bugs during beta testing and removed before a GA release but it's
left in place if a user does a distribution update.
With the debugging RPM installed, the free paths contended on a global
mutex in glibc. Ebizzy had been classified as a CPU intensive and memory
free intensive benchmark (not that common) but turbostat showed that the
CPUs were over 95% of the time in C6 and mpstat verified that the CPUs
were mostly idle. It did not take long to see that everything was blocked
waiting on a futex and to identify where it was in glibc. It's only a
factor when malloc debugging is enabled so normally people would not see it.
The "regression" is because CPUs are reaching C6 as they should and there
is a delay when exiting it. This is behaving as designed and fixing this
would involve doing something stupid. Once the problem RPM was removed
ebizzy performed as expected. 3.13-rc7, the revert and forcing max_cstate=1
all have similar performance.
Sorry about the noise.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-01-13 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1389103248-17617-1-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>
[not found] ` <20140107141715.GA32491@kroah.com>
[not found] ` <20140107185440.GA7844@kroah.com>
[not found] ` <20140107203012.GA27046@suse.de>
[not found] ` <20140108104340.GC27046@suse.de>
2014-01-08 13:48 ` Idle power fix regresses ebizzy performance (was 3.12-stable backport of NUMA balancing patches) Mel Gorman
2014-01-09 4:17 ` Greg KH
2014-01-09 20:07 ` Len Brown
2014-01-10 10:14 ` Mel Gorman
[not found] ` <CAJvTdK=vJxYgtLOYZZPrwGNgYQrFVeCq18RwzEfh5n_tZyeP9g@mail.gmail.com>
2014-01-10 10:26 ` Mel Gorman
2014-01-10 14:38 ` Mel Gorman
2014-01-13 19:24 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2014-01-13 21:12 ` Greg KH
2014-01-14 7:31 ` Len Brown
2014-01-14 8:01 ` Mike Galbraith
2014-01-14 8:24 ` Mike Galbraith
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=20140113192406.GL27046@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=athorlton@sgi.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).