From: "Xing, Zhengjun" <zhengjun.xing@intel.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, aubrey.li@linux.intel.com,
yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [sched/fair] c722f35b51: tbench.throughput-MB/sec -29.1% regression
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 15:22:43 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <304055ef-0c04-676b-3ed2-2b0cd0fe6d0b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ed06ccf4ddb98ec9c31d30d5f92f637bdb890326.camel@surriel.com>
Hi Rik,
Do you have time to look at this? I re-test it in v5.13 and v5.14,
the regression still existed. Thanks.
On 5/27/2021 10:00 AM, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I will try to take a look at this on Friday.
>
> However, even if I manage to reproduce it on one of
> the systems I have access to, I'm still not sure how
> exactly we would root cause the issue.
>
> Is it due to
> select_idle_sibling() doing a little bit
> more work?
>
> Is it because we invoke test_idle_cores() a little
> earlier, widening the race window with CPUs going idle,
> causing select_idle_cpu to do a lot more work?
>
> Is it a locality thing where random placement on any
> core in the LLC is somehow better than placement on
> the same core as "prev" when there is no idle core?
>
> Is it tbench running
> faster when the woken up task is
> placed on the runqueue behind the current task on the
> "target" cpu, even though that CPU isn't currently
> idle, because tbench happens to go to sleep fast?
>
> In other words, I'm
> not quite sure whether this is
> a tbench (and other similar benchmark) specific thing,
> or a kernel thing, or what instrumentation we would
> want in select_idle_sibling / select_idle_cpu for us
> to root cause issues like this more easily in the
> future...
--
Zhengjun Xing
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-03 7:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-19 8:22 kernel test robot
[not found] ` <1d942826-badc-ca0d-6d46-1b207caf7f84@intel.com>
2021-05-27 2:00 ` [LKP] " Rik van Riel
2021-09-03 7:22 ` Xing, Zhengjun [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=304055ef-0c04-676b-3ed2-2b0cd0fe6d0b@intel.com \
--to=zhengjun.xing@intel.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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®