From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758656AbYELJFH (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 May 2008 05:05:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754845AbYELJEz (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 May 2008 05:04:55 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:37346 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754297AbYELJEy (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 May 2008 05:04:54 -0400 X-Authenticated: #14349625 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+8ejh8oyS8EieNDS6H07qs5KiiveDkd1SG3g74ow 7x8RzMbSLAofVM Subject: Re: volanoMark regression with kernel 2.6.26-rc1 From: Mike Galbraith To: "Zhang, Yanmin" Cc: vatsa@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Dhaval Giani , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Ingo Molnar , Aneesh Kumar KV In-Reply-To: <1210568533.3151.13.camel@ymzhang> References: <20080506115207.GA24862@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080507173357.GA4424@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1210223914.3453.102.camel@ymzhang> <20080508054047.GD32729@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1210226013.3453.113.camel@ymzhang> <20080508061125.GC3644@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20080509155240.GH3612@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1210556351.3151.2.camel@ymzhang> <20080512023758.GN3612@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1210563200.3151.10.camel@ymzhang> <20080512045246.GP3612@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1210568533.3151.13.camel@ymzhang> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 11:04:50 +0200 Message-Id: <1210583090.7402.4.camel@marge.simson.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2008-05-12 at 13:02 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > A quick update: > With 2.6.26-rc2 (CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y), volanoMark result on my 8-core stoakley > is about 10% worse than the one of 2.6.26-rc1. Here (Q6600), 2.6.26-rc2 CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y regression culprit for volanomark is the same one identified for mysql+oltp. (i have yet to figure out where the buglet lies, but there is definitely one in there somewhere) 2.6.25.3-smp (baseline, no group scheduling) test-1.log:Average throughput = 102412 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 99636 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 99373 messages per second CONFIG_CGROUPS=n CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y 2.6.26-rc2 - 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 102341 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 101710 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 100572 messages per second 2.6.26-rc2 + 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 79506 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 78168 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 78200 messages per second CONFIG_CGROUPS=y CONFIG_USER_SCHED=y 2.6.26-rc2 - 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 103494 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 100832 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 98840 messages per second 2.6.26-rc2 + 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 80132 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 79410 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 79609 messages per second CONFIG_CGROUPS=y CONFIG_CGROUP_SCHED=y 2.6.26-rc2 - 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 103026 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 101152 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 102616 messages per second 2.6.26-rc2 + 18d95a2832c1392a2d63227a7a6d433cb9f2037e test-1.log:Average throughput = 104174 messages per second test-2.log:Average throughput = 101390 messages per second test-3.log:Average throughput = 101212 messages per second (but there are no task groups set up...)