[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1231837036.11429.27.camel@ymzhang>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:57:16 +0800
From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, ming.m.lin@...el.com,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Performance regression of specjbb2005/aim7 with 2.6.29-rc1
Comparing with 2.6.28's results, specjbb2005 has about 7% regression with 2.6.29-rc1
on my a couple of x86_64 machines. aim7 has about 1.7% regression.
Ming did a quick bisect with aim7 and located below patch.
commit 0a582440ff546e2c6610d1acec325e91b4efd313
Author: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Date: Fri Jan 2 12:16:42 2009 +0100
sched: fix sched_slice()
Impact: fix bad-interactivity buglet
Fix sched_slice() to emit a sane result whether a task is currently
enqueued or not.
Signed-off-by: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Tested-by: Jayson King <dev@...sonking.com>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
After we revert the patch, aim7 regression disappeared. specjbb2005 regression becomes
less than 1.5% on 8-core stokley and disappears on 16-core tigerton. I don't know what
causes the last 1.5% regression.
As tbench has about 5% improvement and oltp(mysql+sysbench) has 5% improvement, we also tested
to make sure such improvement isn't related to above patch. volanoMark's improvement is also not
related to the patch. So it seems safe to revert it.
yanmin
--
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