From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760296AbZJIJTS (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2009 05:19:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756765AbZJIJTR (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2009 05:19:17 -0400 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.21]:38368 "EHLO orsmga101.jf.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753774AbZJIJTR (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Oct 2009 05:19:17 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,530,1249282800"; d="scan'208";a="455932018" Subject: hackbench regression with kernel 2.6.32-rc1 From: "Zhang, Yanmin" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 09 Oct 2009 17:19:03 +0800 Message-Id: <1255079943.25078.23.camel@ymzhang> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.1 (2.22.1-2.fc9) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Comparing with 2.6.31's results, hackbench has some regression on a couple of machines woth kernel 2.6.32-rc1. I run it with commandline: ./hackbench 100 process 2000 1) On 4*4 core tigerton: 70%; 2) On 2*4 core stoakley: 7%. I located below 2 patches. commit 29cd8bae396583a2ee9a3340db8c5102acf9f6fd Author: Peter Zijlstra Date: Thu Sep 17 09:01:14 2009 +0200 sched: Fix SD_POWERSAVING_BALANCE|SD_PREFER_LOCAL vs SD_WAKE_AFFINE and commit de69a80be32445b0a71e8e3b757e584d7beb90f7 Author: Peter Zijlstra Date: Thu Sep 17 09:01:20 2009 +0200 sched: Stop buddies from hogging the system 1) On 4*4 core tigerton: if I revert patch 29cd8b, the regression becomes less than 55%; If I revert the 2 patches, all regression disappears. 2) On 2*4 core stakley: If I revert the 2 patches, comparing with 2.6.31, I get about 8% improvement instead of regression. Sorry for reporting the regression later as there is a long national holiday. Yanmin