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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087B6C0018C for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:01:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAAEF233CF for ; Wed, 16 Dec 2020 13:01:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726110AbgLPNBp (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2020 08:01:45 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:49343 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725960AbgLPNBp (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2020 08:01:45 -0500 IronPort-SDR: E6evPb+e+h8/AzB+rrMkZn46rmsIno8vZyrFkM0w+FPALAUH0j6Yu1/e0IMR0Kb0kp5SiHCwPa 7qqzkdLK45vw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9836"; a="172486564" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,424,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="172486564" Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Dec 2020 05:00:00 -0800 IronPort-SDR: sQKQ139n++Ht1f0zX7jnFE/HNyMvElPDc5DkGKcZsX3hXlMNxdeP4cnRw20apgnNgLguTQc3NM XXrkHBqLnQiw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,424,1599548400"; d="scan'208";a="384548392" Received: from cli6-desk1.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.239.161.125]) ([10.239.161.125]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 16 Dec 2020 04:59:57 -0800 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] select_idle_sibling() wreckage To: Peter Zijlstra , mgorman@techsingularity.net, vincent.guittot@linaro.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, juri.lelli@redhat.com, valentin.schneider@arm.com, qais.yousef@arm.com, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com, benbjiang@gmail.com References: <20201214164822.402812729@infradead.org> From: "Li, Aubrey" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 20:59:56 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201214164822.402812729@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Peter, On 2020/12/15 0:48, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hai, here them patches Mel asked for. They've not (yet) been through the > robots, so there might be some build fail for configs I've not used. > > Benchmark time :-) > Here is the data on my side, benchmarks were tested on a x86 4 sockets system with 24 cores per socket and 2 hyperthreads per core, total 192 CPUs. uperf throughput: netperf workload, tcp_nodelay, r/w size = 90 threads baseline-avg %std patch-avg %std 96 1 0.78 1.0072 1.09 144 1 0.58 1.0204 0.83 192 1 0.66 1.0151 0.52 240 1 2.08 0.8990 0.75 hackbench: process mode, 25600 loops, 40 file descriptors per group group baseline-avg %std patch-avg %std 2(80) 1 10.02 1.0339 9.94 3(120) 1 6.69 1.0049 6.92 4(160) 1 6.76 0.8663 8.74 5(200) 1 2.96 0.9651 4.28 schbench: 99th percentile latency, 16 workers per message thread mthread baseline-avg %std patch-avg %std 6(96) 1 0.88 1.0055 0.81 9(144) 1 0.59 1.0007 0.37 12(192) 1 0.61 0.9973 0.82 15(240) 1 25.05 0.9251 18.36 sysbench mysql throughput: read/write, table size = 10,000,000 thread baseline-avg %std patch-avg %std 96 1 6.62 0.9668 4.04 144 1 9.29 0.9579 6.53 192 1 9.52 0.9503 5.35 240 1 8.55 0.9657 3.34 It looks like - hackbench has a significant improvement of 4 groups - uperf has a significant regression of 240 threads Please let me know if you have any interested cases I can run/rerun. Thanks, -Aubrey