mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [futex]  7c4f75a21f: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops 98.3% regression
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2025 17:51:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250603155152.WGVMzZhN@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202505291011.9fe37568-lkp@intel.com>

On 2025-05-29 12:50:44 [+0800], kernel test robot wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello,
Hi,

> kernel test robot noticed a 98.3% regression of will-it-scale.per_thread_ops on:
> commit: 7c4f75a21f636486d2969d9b6680403ea8483539 ("futex: Allow automatic allocation of process wide futex hash")

there are several reports about a regressions and improvements regarding
the futex per-process series. The regression reports outweigh
improvements. The percentages vary also the offending commit does.

The test uses "random" memory allocations and locking so we get what we
get. We could use the prctl() function to set it back to the global hash
and let it behave as it did before.

I'm not exactly sure what causes this. It could be "less" hash buckets
and therefore higher hash collision or the atomic-inc/ dec on the hash
bucket. The commit referenced in the report creates only a private hash
of 16 buckets. A few commits later this is change to auto-scale. So it
would get better if the smaller hash is the problem.

Sebastian

      reply	other threads:[~2025-06-03 15:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-05-29  4:50 kernel test robot
2025-06-03 15:51 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [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=20250603155152.WGVMzZhN@linutronix.de \
    --to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=oliver.sang@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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®