From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Ajay Patel <patela@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Lmbench performance drop 2.6.18-->2.6.27
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:20:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1258712409.15530.26.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <90f56e480911191313n1050831ft4369ab5fcb937c01@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2009-11-19 at 13:13 -0800, Ajay Patel wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Part of our evaluation to upgrade kernel we
> ran lmbench. The lmbench results shows significant performance
> drop from 2.6.18 to 2.6.27. (Results attached)
>
> The benchmark was performed on same hardware with
> different distro. (Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 2346 HE,
> cpu MHz : 1795.597, cache size : 512 KB, x86_64 kernel)
>
> The 2.6.18 based distribution was from CentOS release 5.4.
> (Linux cento-5.4 2.6.18-164.el5).
> The 2.6.27 based distribution was from FC10.
> (Fedora Core release 10 2.6.27.5-117.fc10-x86_64).
>
> Does this results make sense? Is this expected?
> Am I doing something wrong?
I think most of what you're seeing is config differences and the fact
that microbenchmarks are excellent at showing how horribly expensive
cache misses are. You see radically different numbers when two halves
of a microbenchmark land in the same cache vs landing across the fence
from one another.
Sometimes affinity is great, sometimes not so great. For evaluating,
wide spectrum testing is much safer than microbenchmarks, they can be
very misleading. lmbench is really good at showing us that affinity
logic has always been a sore spot, and I'm very sure that's what you're
seeing.
Below are some numbers from my supermarket Q6600 box. Notice the wild
swings when affinity goes wrong/right, same as your numbers. Check out
the UNIX socket numbers in the last three lines. Wake affine to cache
rather than to CPU, and that's what you get for that microbenchmark.
Latency numbers don't look very appetizing, but throughput goes through
the roof.
*Local* Communication latencies in microseconds - smaller is better
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS 2p/0K Pipe AF UDP RPC/ TCP RPC/ TCP
ctxsw UNIX UDP TCP conn
--------- ------------- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----
marge Linux 2.6.27. 1.070 3.757 4.87 8.305 12.7 12.9 16.1 34.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 0.880 3.364 5.72 7.950 11.8 12.8 15.3 34.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 0.810 3.458 4.77 7.978 11.7 12.9 15.3 34.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 0.860 3.408 5.80 7.981 11.9 30.4 15.3 34.
marge Linux 2.6.31. 0.820 3.127 5.63 8.060 13.0 29.6 16.6 34.
marge Linux 2.6.31. 0.760 3.119 5.64 8.105 13.1 29.6 16.8 36.
marge Linux 2.6.22. 4.420 10.9 20.7 7.705 10.7 22.5 29.9 27.
marge Linux 2.6.22. 4.460 3.298 5.16 7.648 10.7 22.4 30.0 26.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.830 3.069 4.92 8.337 13.0 13.1 17.6 37.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.810 3.041 5.72 9.902 13.4 13.2 17.3 36.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.800 3.050 5.65 8.312 13.4 13.0 17.2 36.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.790 3.113 5.55 9.925 13.4 13.0 17.4 36.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.800 3.082 4.78 8.353 13.4 13.0 17.2 36.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 0.780 3.086 5.59 8.332 13.4 13.1 17.2 36.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 1.470 4.758 7.32 10.1 13.4 12.9 16.7 21.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 1.460 4.736 7.60 10.1 13.4 13.0 16.5 21.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 1.290 4.571 7.69 10.1 13.3 12.9 16.4 21.
*Local* Communication bandwidths in MB/s - bigger is better
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Host OS Pipe AF TCP File Mmap Bcopy Bcopy Mem Mem
UNIX reread reread (libc) (hand) read write
--------- ------------- ---- ---- ---- ------ ------ ------ ------ ---- -----
marge Linux 2.6.27. 2706 2535 1142 2793.2 4786.3 1285.4 1235.7 4456 1685.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 2737 2811 749. 2773.3 4798.8 1245.3 1235.9 4387 1685.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 2746 2838 2617 2785.0 4763.6 1239.6 1237.8 4423 1688.
marge Linux 2.6.27. 2711 2776 2653 2772.8 4842.4 1404.5 1394.1 4492 1765.
marge Linux 2.6.31. 2759 2847 735. 2808.2 4800.2 1238.4 1231.8 4485 1683.
marge Linux 2.6.31. 2756 2842 1125 2792.1 4788.9 1239.8 1235.0 4475 1681.
marge Linux 2.6.22. 2692 1843 1017 2746.4 4763.6 1293.3 1278.4 4439 1678.
marge Linux 2.6.22. 2865 1872 1015 2776.4 4803.4 1291.7 1320.8 4421 1679.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2780 2889 2812 2802.0 4833.7 1239.2 1233.6 4510 1683.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2782 2892 2808 2808.4 4819.8 1240.5 1232.3 4438 1682.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2786 2877 2810 2824.7 4802.2 1237.9 1234.8 4433 1601.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2767 2873 1129 2801.7 4803.4 1238.3 1234.6 4467 1688.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2761 2890 736. 2814.8 4793.0 1245.4 1233.4 4483 1687.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2748 2883 755. 2805.1 4823.6 1243.0 1233.9 4353 1683.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 1776 5116 2814 2809.7 4759.5 1245.4 1232.3 4451 1681.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2997 5119 1147 2809.7 4787.3 1242.2 1236.4 4462 1682.
marge Linux 2.6.32- 2999 5122 1138 2808.3 4803.8 1242.7 1236.5 4498 1685.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-20 10:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-19 21:13 Ajay Patel
2009-11-20 10:20 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
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=1258712409.15530.26.camel@marge.simson.net \
--to=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patela@gmail.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®