From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ming.m.lin@intel.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Performance regression of specjbb2005/aim7 with 2.6.29-rc1
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:57:16 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1231837036.11429.27.camel@ymzhang> (raw)
Comparing with 2.6.28's results, specjbb2005 has about 7% regression with 2.6.29-rc1
on my a couple of x86_64 machines. aim7 has about 1.7% regression.
Ming did a quick bisect with aim7 and located below patch.
commit 0a582440ff546e2c6610d1acec325e91b4efd313
Author: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Date: Fri Jan 2 12:16:42 2009 +0100
sched: fix sched_slice()
Impact: fix bad-interactivity buglet
Fix sched_slice() to emit a sane result whether a task is currently
enqueued or not.
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Tested-by: Jayson King <dev@jaysonking.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
After we revert the patch, aim7 regression disappeared. specjbb2005 regression becomes
less than 1.5% on 8-core stokley and disappears on 16-core tigerton. I don't know what
causes the last 1.5% regression.
As tbench has about 5% improvement and oltp(mysql+sysbench) has 5% improvement, we also tested
to make sure such improvement isn't related to above patch. volanoMark's improvement is also not
related to the patch. So it seems safe to revert it.
yanmin
next reply other threads:[~2009-01-13 8:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-13 8:57 Zhang, Yanmin [this message]
2009-01-13 9:37 ` Mike Galbraith
2009-01-15 2:30 ` Lin Ming
2009-01-15 7:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 16:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 17:54 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 18:53 ` Jayson King
2009-01-15 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-16 0:49 ` Lin Ming
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=1231837036.11429.27.camel@ymzhang \
--to=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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
Powered by JetHome