[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110502061411.GA16682@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 08:14:11 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Stephan Barwolf <stephan.baerwolf@...ilmenau.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/19] Increase resolution of load weights
* Nikhil Rao <ncrao@...gle.com> wrote:
> 1. Performance costs
>
> Ran 50 iterations of Ingo's pipe-test-100k program (100k pipe ping-pongs).
> See http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1129232/focus=1129389 for more
> info.
>
> 64-bit build.
>
> 2.6.39-rc5 (baseline):
>
> Performance counter stats for './pipe-test-100k' (50 runs):
>
> 905,034,914 instructions # 0.345 IPC ( +- 0.016% )
> 2,623,924,516 cycles ( +- 0.759% )
>
> 1.518543478 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.513% )
>
> 2.6.39-rc5 + patchset:
>
> Performance counter stats for './pipe-test-100k' (50 runs):
>
> 905,351,545 instructions # 0.343 IPC ( +- 0.018% )
> 2,638,939,777 cycles ( +- 0.761% )
>
> 1.509101452 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.537% )
>
> There is a marginal increase in instruction retired, about 0.034%; and marginal
> increase in cycles counted, about 0.57%.
Not sure this increase is statistically significant: both effects are within
noise and look at elapsed time, it actually went down.
Btw., to best measure context-switching costs you should do something like:
taskset 1 perf stat --repeat 50 ./pipe-test-100k
to pin both tasks to the same CPU. This reduces noise and makes the numbers
more relevant: SMP costs do not increase due to your patchset.
So it would be nice to re-run the 64-bit tests with the pipe test bound to a
single CPU.
> 32-bit build.
>
> 2.6.39-rc5 (baseline):
>
> Performance counter stats for './pipe-test-100k' (50 runs):
>
> 1,025,151,722 instructions # 0.238 IPC ( +- 0.018% )
> 4,303,226,625 cycles ( +- 0.524% )
>
> 2.133056844 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.619% )
>
> 2.6.39-rc5 + patchset:
>
> Performance counter stats for './pipe-test-100k' (50 runs):
>
> 1,070,610,068 instructions # 0.239 IPC ( +- 1.369% )
> 4,478,912,974 cycles ( +- 1.011% )
>
> 2.293382242 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.144% )
>
> On 32-bit kernels, instructions retired increases by about 4.4% with this
> patchset. CPU cycles also increases by about 4%.
>
> There is a marginal increase in instruction retired, about 0.034%; and
> marginal increase in cycles counted, about 0.57%.
These results look more bothersome, a clear increase in both cycles, elapsed
time, and instructions retired, well beyond measurement noise.
Given that scheduling costs are roughly 30% of that pipe test-case, the cost
increase to the scheduler is probably around:
instructions: +14.5%
cycles: +13.3%
That is rather significant.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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