[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001200741000.2906@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 07:51:41 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>
cc: RT <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Carsten Emde <ce@...g.ch>,
John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: NUMA modifications to cyclictest
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Clark Williams wrote:
> RT-ers,
>
> Lately we've been struggling with some performance issues on high-core
> count (>16 cores) NUMA machines with the RT kernel. During the course
> of troubleshooting this issue, we tried using the 'numactl' program to
> constrain our measurement testing tool (rteval) to a particular memory
> node, rather than letting everything float. Doing so showed marked
> improvement in both max latency and jitter. While this doesn't solve
> our performance problems I thought it might make sense to have a --numa
> mode for cylictest that compliments the --smp mode just added.
>
> The big difference here is that when using --numa, each measurement
> thread (one per cpu) has it's stack allocated from the memory node
> associated with it's cpu. Also, the major data structures for each
> thread (parameter block, statistics block and histogram) are allocated
> from the appropriate node. This is done with calls into libnuma,
> which means this will add a dependency on libnuma.
That might cause some trouble for embedded folks. :(
> The intent is to measure latency on a numa system in the same way a
> well-written RT application would run on a NUMA machine, that is
> minimizing the off-node memory references.
Agreed.
tglx
--
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