From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753929Ab3AZNKY (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:10:24 -0500 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.10]:49906 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753630Ab3AZNKV (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Jan 2013 08:10:21 -0500 Message-ID: <1359205815.22942.14.camel@marge.simpson.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 0/5] x86,smp: make ticket spinlock proportional backoff w/ auto tuning From: Mike Galbraith To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Rik van Riel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aquini@redhat.com, walken@google.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, lwoodman@redhat.com, knoel@redhat.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com, raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@redhat.com Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 14:10:15 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20130126120509.GD13445@gmail.com> References: <20130125140553.060b8ced@annuminas.surriel.com> <1359184867.5835.85.camel@marge.simpson.net> <20130126120509.GD13445@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:GKNw3cssn9NTgTBlSljADjrgv9J+b+swKb56l7rovFH ie0E+eIL7suTogpJ1x+BKKloEtPtJmX/NR8lZqQ3guq+zQ4i+P 7NrImCSZ730SMJd0hZfHnbGWYozQT+bi2QyfdabEhK54v6/mWz 2+lYN6xPq6Qb8QxzFbGIgaXJ2//846Pf3T6JT3J5ZDl0LrKKWA 5L6n0F8Eas8Ats5yTS/Zgw2hpNPREAY9WBgOpzDk3/sss2uMyp zIlXJsGg6JmMoq9+fbUL79dEQioZgSgByLMYft4sp6oYzGiXOu +Fj2gqq1pQZxR/gJuDDXXyJPj/wnu2xU6m/dM0KzCtp71aTkRF OmZ3fFM+s5Uxfwb0Urrsx7L04Gwl1/3kEp9DzVQJe61CbSMP5t lImQqytYdxHnw== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2013-01-26 at 13:05 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Fri, 2013-01-25 at 14:05 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > > The performance issue observed with AIM7 is still a mystery. > > > > Hm. AIM7 mystery _may_ be the same crud I see on a 4 node 40 > > core box. Stock scheduler knobs are too preempt happy, produce > > unstable results. I twiddle them as below to stabilize > > results. > > > > I'm testing a load balancing series from Alex Shi with AIM7 > > and whatnot, added your series on top of it and retested. > > What I see is improvement. > > Since we want both series that's good news, agreed? Yes, both look good. BTW, the balance and powersaving low end improvements in the Alex set are not due to any select_idle_sibling() misbehavior as one might suspect when looking at the set, it's innocent (this time), it's the balancing policies themselves. I don't see where it comes from, gotta be some turbo thingy methinks, but who cares, better is better. -Mike