From: "Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: <oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev>, <lkp@intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andrea Righi <arighi@nvidia.com>, <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:sched/core] [sched/topology] 9e005ed211: stress-ng.kill.ops_per_sec 4.6% regression
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2026 13:01:56 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3de9f11b-d10f-4a1e-9239-e3cccdd36ce5@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202606111053.c484a580-lkp@intel.com>
On 6/11/2026 10:19 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> kernel test robot noticed a 4.6% regression of stress-ng.kill.ops_per_sec on:
>
>
> commit: 9e005ed21152d4a4bb0ceea71045ff8a642a6feb ("sched/topology: Allow multiple domains to claim sched_domain_shared")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git sched/core
>
>
> testcase: stress-ng
> config: x86_64-rhel-9.4
> compiler: gcc-14
> test machine: 256 threads 4 sockets INTEL(R) XEON(R) PLATINUM 8592+ (Emerald Rapids) with 256G memory
> parameters:
>
> nr_threads: 100%
> testtime: 60s
> test: kill
> cpufreq_governor: performance
>
>
This 4.6% difference is very small and within normal run-to-run variance
IMO, as
the commit has no functional changes.
BTW the commit log indicates nr_idle_scan is
initialized to a stale value 512, sds->alloc_flags = SD_SHARE_LLC, the
wakeup
before the next period LB in this LLC domain might have slight higher
latency though.
But consider your test last for 60 seconds which is much longer than the
first period LB,
this should not be a problem.
thanks,
Chenyu
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-11 5:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-11 2:19 kernel test robot
2026-06-11 5:01 ` Chen, Yu C [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=3de9f11b-d10f-4a1e-9239-e3cccdd36ce5@intel.com \
--to=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
--cc=arighi@nvidia.com \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--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 \
--cc=x86@kernel.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