mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>
To: Jirka Hladky <jhladky@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: sched : performance regression 24% between 4.4rc4 and 4.3 kernel
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2015 08:04:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1449903863.9638.8.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE4VaGAziCRGRXPPO6YtiHLXqeLUMcuYCh3mkmGpDjfW8GaetQ@mail.gmail.com>

(it's always a good idea to CC subsystem maintainers when reporting) 

On Fri, 2015-12-11 at 15:17 +0100, Jirka Hladky wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> we are doing performance testing of the new kernel scheduler (commit
> 53528695ff6d8b77011bc818407c13e30914a946). In most cases we see
> performance improvements compared to 4.3 kernel with the exception of
> stream benchmark when running on 4 NUMA node server.
> 
> When we run 4 stream benchmark processes on 4 NUMA node server and we
> compare the total performance we see drop about 24% compared to 4.3
> kernel. This is caused by the fact that 2 stream benchmarks are
> running on the same NUMA node while 1 NUMA node does not run any
> stream benchmark. With kernel 4.3, load is distributed evenly among
> all 4 NUMA nodes. When two stream benchmarks are running on the same
> NUMA node then the runtime is almost twice as long compared to one
> stream bench running on one NUMA node. See log files [1] bellow.
> 
> Please see the graph comparing stream benchmark results between
> kernel
> 4.3 and 4.4rc4 (for legend see [2] bellow).
> https://jhladky.fedorapeople.org/sched_stream_kernel_4.3vs4.4rc4/Stre
> am_benchmark_on_4_NUMA_node_server_4.3vs4.4rc4_kernel.png
> 
> Could you please help us to identify the root cause of this
> regression? We don't have the skills to fix the problem ourselves but
> we will be more than happy to test any proposed patch for this issue.

A bisection doesn't require any special skills, but may give busy
maintainers a single change to eyeball vs the entire lot. 

	-Mike

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-12  7:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-11 14:17 Jirka Hladky
2015-12-12  7:04 ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2015-12-12 14:16   ` Jirka Hladky
2015-12-12 14:37     ` Mike Galbraith
2015-12-15  0:02       ` Jirka Hladky
2015-12-15  0:04       ` Jirka Hladky
     [not found]       ` <CAE4VaGCgAvvQXDsv=Gn8B0JtTzCnXe0oP63HLQWSCyY_QNOB7g@mail.gmail.com>
2015-12-15  2:12         ` Rik van Riel
2015-12-15  8:49           ` Jirka Hladky
2015-12-16 12:56             ` Jirka Hladky
2015-12-16 13:50               ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-12-16 17:04                 ` Jirka Hladky
     [not found]                   ` <CAE4VaGD49UAsBJn3jgg0kREWqjYz8UnvWOi8zU4d5HgNgNS-sQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-12-17 15:43                     ` Jirka Hladky
2015-12-18  2:49                       ` Mike Galbraith

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=1449903863.9638.8.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com \
    --cc=jhladky@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --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