lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 02:02:39 +0800 From: Yuyang Du <yuyang.du@...el.com> To: Jason Low <jason.low2@...com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>, Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@...com>, Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Reduce contention in update_cfs_rq_blocked_load On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 11:21:35AM -0700, Jason Low wrote: > I ran these tests with most of the AIM7 workloads to compare its > performance between a 3.16 kernel and the kernel with these patches > applied. > > The table below contains the percent difference between the baseline > kernel and the kernel with the patches at various user counts. A > positive percent means the kernel with the patches performed better, > while a negative percent means the baseline performed better. > > Based on these numbers, for many of the workloads, the change was > beneficial in those highly contended, while it had - impact in many > of the lightly/moderately contended case (10 to 90 users). > > ----------------------------------------------------- > | 10-90 | 100-1000 | 1100-2000 > | users | users | users > ----------------------------------------------------- > alltests | -3.37% | -10.64% | -2.25% > ----------------------------------------------------- > all_utime | +0.33% | +3.73% | +3.33% > ----------------------------------------------------- > compute | -5.97% | +2.34% | +3.22% > ----------------------------------------------------- > custom | -31.61% | -10.29% | +15.23% > ----------------------------------------------------- > disk | +24.64% | +28.96% | +21.28% > ----------------------------------------------------- > fserver | -1.35% | +4.82% | +9.35% > ----------------------------------------------------- > high_systime | -6.73% | -6.28% | +12.36% > ----------------------------------------------------- > shared | -28.31% | -19.99% | -7.10% > ----------------------------------------------------- > short | -44.63% | -37.48% | -33.62% > ----------------------------------------------------- > Thanks, Jason. Sorry for late response. What about the variation of the tests? The machine you test on? Yuyang -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists