From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56BD7C001B0 for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2023 20:33:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235318AbjHHUdl (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Aug 2023 16:33:41 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40176 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233410AbjHHUdZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Aug 2023 16:33:25 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E761114657B for ; Tue, 8 Aug 2023 10:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1bc83a96067so5512445ad.0 for ; Tue, 08 Aug 2023 10:02:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1691514145; x=1692118945; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=vnozp/b9dnXWXae8GvLhMYgmjuVN/9hoLY0HzJZOWms=; b=Q3YJz+hOUdw7M4oLMBhLOVOlDxOthiuWjowF0DNj3XFW31kGzeevAzX7ZJSr3kJDBu F5hSo+7LAqaWMaf07iapF8x85yGCKclR10gj8GDJfp2cNt0V6IuCitlXocLvuYECQ+ec PVfFD5xZ5P4U+H6KZvHOiVEdcUd1rPkn1x5B+VbSsnZbLTwDZoXMQKLOm6QZ9xNFEKrg yxCQ1vPX4DGhKZmbkeEIBj85sPKDt3n+/J267rgTHAxYoM7Fkm6Vah98ItB2Gzzvm+SQ srD4pbmkJQdGzxJd1/mDPUFXoVMrkyslmr8hZ4qaiUM8eWooO5wKSIBNPMiEapFEF6hf K0bw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1691514145; x=1692118945; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=vnozp/b9dnXWXae8GvLhMYgmjuVN/9hoLY0HzJZOWms=; b=jC/LMJuDREPbIUnFa3ZSGjB8Dkrs9Zry22E9ZPqXBPRbiQ3UbVGnl5j02fepdue8D+ efGOwZd20VJXFygPEKLSTJzTVxFraIZJOlSev8IEscPXe0JIEOfI4QDvqR7O7gHsAHAj 0RvGUcKRxxa/mFrm63JCPssLVIEeoDzE3BmknAkD4jARXZf6UGsB0nzyaAFYTu3oYLUE cMBsQtVRvUU+X8fCht5f9Zxbua4TIFFTGd4HqBMPM9lXXmw1kEryhwOohtFH5piYBdE6 6LxkLKDexp19XCVKS4UlCEh6Y6pW9ZGJPFsY22q6Aen9IEaYwScx0b4sK/NAMwAOjnvr gfhA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yzm1Vr6HEFBfvk0YOxexxj2Vn8eG/yIag2glLgS1q88dvdzcpfs KNMFPny9tFZ2F3i7Al+GbdjWBXWS3wU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGC9dvtTvH0viAnExLQ4tFE1Kw1WIZZ+19UH5J+6ELlo5ikIVHoJgGzCtO9RyJBCLLVfg7QRw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:1284:b0:3a3:1424:7258 with SMTP id a4-20020a056808128400b003a314247258mr17258338oiw.3.1691481544616; Tue, 08 Aug 2023 00:59:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:9d5d]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id em5-20020a17090b014500b002680b2d2ab6sm9890488pjb.19.2023.08.08.00.59.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 08 Aug 2023 00:59:03 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Tejun Heo Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 21:59:01 -1000 From: Tejun Heo To: K Prateek Nayak Cc: jiangshanlai@gmail.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, joshdon@google.com, brho@google.com, briannorris@chromium.org, nhuck@google.com, agk@redhat.com, snitzer@kernel.org, void@manifault.com Subject: Re: [PATCHSET v1 wq/for-6.5] workqueue: Improve unbound workqueue execution locality Message-ID: References: <20230519001709.2563-1-tj@kernel.org> <94da0dc0-a30d-33d5-b3d5-784bbd59c549@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <94da0dc0-a30d-33d5-b3d5-784bbd59c549@amd.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 08:28:53AM +0530, K Prateek Nayak wrote: > > Assuming that the tbench difference was a testing artifact, I'm applying the > > patchset to wq/for-6.6 so that it can receive wider testing. Prateek, I'd > > really appreciate if you could repeat the test and see whether the > > difference persists. > > Sure. I'll retest with for-6.6 branch. Will post the results here once the > tests are done. I'll repeat the same - test with the defaults and the ones > that show any difference in results, I'll rerun them with various affinity > scopes. I think it'd be helpful to pick one benchmark setup which shows clear difference and repeat it multiple times while taking measures to avoid systemic biases (e.g. instead of running all of control followed by all of test, separate them into several segments and interleave them). Thanks. -- tejun