From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
Gautham Shenoy <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [tip: sched/core] sched/eevdf: Curb wakeup-preemption
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 17:30:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <02f6a15f094adb3c8d9957b031941d6bd10c2e43.camel@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21f3d376-17d6-8fb6-5f35-507ea931c0d3@amd.com>
On Mon, 2023-08-21 at 16:09 +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> Sorry for being late to the party but couple of benchmarks are unhappy
> (very!) with eevdf, even with this optimization. I'll leave the results
> of testing on a dual socket 3rd Generation EPYC System (2 x 64C/128T)
> running in NPS1 mode below.
>
> tl;dr
>
> - Hackbench with medium load, tbench when overloaded, and DeathStarBench
> are not a fan of EEVDF so far :(
FWIW, there are more tbench shards lying behind EEVDF than in front.
tbench 8 on old i7-4790 box
4.4.302 4024
6.4.11 3668
6.4.11-eevdf 3522
I went a-hunting once, but it didn't go well. There were a couple
identifiable sched related dips/recoveries, but the overall result was
a useless downward trending mess.
-Mike
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-21 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-10 13:24 [tip:sched/eevdf] [sched/fair] e0c2ff903c: phoronix-test-suite.blogbench.Write.final_score -34.8% regression kernel test robot
2023-08-11 1:11 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-11 2:42 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-14 13:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-14 18:32 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-15 23:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 3:54 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-16 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 13:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-16 15:38 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-16 20:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-17 1:25 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-17 15:10 ` [tip: sched/core] sched/eevdf: Curb wakeup-preemption tip-bot2 for Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-21 10:39 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-08-21 15:30 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2023-08-22 3:03 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-08-22 6:09 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-08-25 6:41 ` K Prateek Nayak
2023-09-19 9:02 ` [PATCH] sched/fair: Do not wakeup-preempt same-prio SCHED_OTHER tasks Ingo Molnar
2023-09-19 9:48 ` Mike Galbraith
2023-09-22 10:00 ` kernel test robot
2023-09-25 11:07 ` Ingo Molnar
2023-09-25 16:45 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-18 1:09 ` [tip:sched/eevdf] [sched/fair] e0c2ff903c: phoronix-test-suite.blogbench.Write.final_score -34.8% regression Chen Yu
2023-08-22 6:48 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-22 7:07 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-16 3:40 ` Chen Yu
2023-08-16 9:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-14 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-08-18 1:54 ` Chen Yu
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=02f6a15f094adb3c8d9957b031941d6bd10c2e43.camel@gmx.de \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®