mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joseph Salisbury <joseph.salisbury@oracle.com>
To: Cristian Prundeanu <cpru@amazon.com>, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Bjoern Doebel <doebel@amazon.com>,
	Hazem Mohamed Abuelfotoh <abuehaze@amazon.com>,
	Geoff Blake <blakgeof@amazon.com>,
	Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com>, Csaba Csoma <csabac@amazon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] [tip: sched/core] sched: Disable PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY and move them to sysctl
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2024 15:10:57 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ca5c6d15-7205-45e0-96a9-e78ab2a52b45@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241017052000.99200-1-cpru@amazon.com>




On 10/17/24 01:19, Cristian Prundeanu wrote:
> This patchset disables the scheduler features PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY
> and moves them to sysctl.
>
> Replacing CFS with the EEVDF scheduler in kernel 6.6 introduced
> significant performance degradation in multiple database-oriented
> workloads. This degradation manifests in all kernel versions using EEVDF,
> across multiple Linux distributions, hardware architectures (x86_64,
> aarm64, amd64), and CPU generations.
>
> For example, running mysql+hammerdb results in a 12-17% throughput
> reduction and 12-18% latency increase compared to kernel 6.5 (using
> default scheduler settings everywhere). The magnitude of this performance
> impact is comparable to the average performance difference of a CPU
> generation over its predecessor.
>
> Testing combinations of available scheduler features showed that the
> largest improvement (short of disabling all EEVDF features) came from
> disabling both PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY:
>
> Kernel   | default  | NO_PLACE_LAG and
> aarm64   | config   | NO_RUN_TO_PARITY
> ---------+----------+-----------------
> 6.5      | baseline |  N/A
> 6.6      | -13.2%   | -6.8%
> 6.7      | -13.1%   | -6.0%
> 6.8      | -12.3%   | -6.5%
> 6.9      | -12.7%   | -6.9%
> 6.10     | -13.5%   | -5.8%
> 6.11     | -12.6%   | -5.8%
> 6.12-rc2 | -12.2%   | -8.9%
> ---------+----------+-----------------
>
> Kernel   | default  | NO_PLACE_LAG and
> x86_64   | config   | NO_RUN_TO_PARITY
> ---------+----------+-----------------
> 6.5      | baseline |  N/A
> 6.6      | -16.8%   | -10.8%
> 6.7      | -16.4%   |  -9.9%
> 6.8      | -17.2%   |  -9.5%
> 6.9      | -17.4%   |  -9.7%
> 6.10     | -16.5%   |  -9.0%
> 6.11     | -15.0%   |  -8.5%
> 6.12-rc2 | -12.7%   | -10.9%
> ---------+----------+-----------------
>
> While the long term approach is debugging and fixing the scheduler
> behavior, algorithm changes to address performance issues of this nature
> are specialized (and likely prolonged or open-ended) research. Until a
> change is identified which fixes the performance degradation, in the
> interest of a better out-of-the-box performance: (1) disable these
> features by default, and (2) expose these values in sysctl instead of
> debugfs, so they can be more easily persisted across reboots.
>
> Cristian Prundeanu (2):
>    sched: Disable PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY
>    sched: Move PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY to sysctl
>
>   include/linux/sched/sysctl.h |  8 ++++++++
>   kernel/sched/core.c          | 13 +++++++++++++
>   kernel/sched/fair.c          |  5 +++--
>   kernel/sched/features.h      | 10 ----------
>   kernel/sysctl.c              | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>   5 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
Hi Cristian,

This is a confirmation that we are also seeing a 9% performance 
regression with the TPCC benchmark after v6.6-rc1.  We narrowed down the 
regression was caused due to commit:
86bfbb7ce4f6 ("sched/fair: Add lag based placement")

This regression was reported via this thread:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1c447727-92ed-416c-bca1-a7ca0974f0df@oracle.com/

Phil Auld suggested to try turning off the PLACE_LAG sched feature. We 
tested with NO_PLACE_LAG and can confirm it brought back 5% of the 
performance loss.  We do not yet know what effect NO_PLACE_LAG will have 
on other benchmarks, but it indeed helps TPCC.

Thanks for the work to move PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY to sysctl!

Joe



  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-11-14 20:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-10-17  5:19 Cristian Prundeanu
2024-10-17  5:19 ` [PATCH 1/2] [tip: sched/core] sched: Disable PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY Cristian Prundeanu
2024-10-17  5:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] [tip: sched/core] sched: Move PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY to sysctl Cristian Prundeanu
2024-10-17  9:10 ` [PATCH 0/2] [tip: sched/core] sched: Disable PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY and move them " Peter Zijlstra
2024-10-17 18:19   ` Prundeanu, Cristian
2024-10-18  7:07     ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-10-18  9:54     ` Mohamed Abuelfotoh, Hazem
2024-11-14 20:10 ` Joseph Salisbury [this message]
2024-11-19 10:29   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-11-25 11:35 ` Cristian Prundeanu
2024-11-26  3:58   ` K Prateek Nayak
2024-11-26 15:12   ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-11-28 10:32   ` Cristian Prundeanu
2024-11-29 10:12     ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-10-19  2:30 Prundeanu, Cristian
2024-10-24  8:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2024-10-25 14:43   ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-10-29  4:57     ` Cristian Prundeanu
2024-10-30 10:21       ` Dietmar Eggemann
2024-11-01 13:05       ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-11-04 10:19       ` Gautham R. Shenoy
2024-11-04 10:34         ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-01-19 11:04 [GIT PULL] sched/urgent for v6.13 Borislav Petkov
2025-01-28 23:09 [PATCH 0/2] [tip: sched/core] sched: Disable PLACE_LAG and RUN_TO_PARITY and move them to sysctl Cristian Prundeanu
2025-02-11  3:27 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-02-12  5:41   ` Cristian Prundeanu
2025-02-12  9:43     ` Peter Zijlstra

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=ca5c6d15-7205-45e0-96a9-e78ab2a52b45@oracle.com \
    --to=joseph.salisbury@oracle.com \
    --cc=abuehaze@amazon.com \
    --cc=alisaidi@amazon.com \
    --cc=blakgeof@amazon.com \
    --cc=cpru@amazon.com \
    --cc=csabac@amazon.com \
    --cc=doebel@amazon.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®