Message-ID: <4FE96A3A.2080307@intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:52:26 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>
To:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
CC:	Alex Shi <lkml.alex@...il.com>, Petr Holasek <pholasek@...hat.com>,
	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Hillf Danton <dhillf@...il.com>, Dan Smith <danms@...ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao@...il.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: AutoNUMA15

On 06/21/2012 10:55 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 03:29:52PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>>> I released an AutoNUMA15 branch that includes all pending fixes:
>>>
>>> git clone --reference linux -b autonuma15 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrea/aa.git
>>>
>>
>> I did a quick testing on our
>> specjbb2005/oltp/hackbench/tbench/netperf-loop/fio/ffsb on NHM EP/EX,
>> Core2 EP, Romely EP machine, In generally no clear performance change
>> found. Is this results expected for this patch set?
> 
> hackbench and network benchs won't get benefit (the former
> overschedule like crazy so there's no way any autonuma balancing can
> have effect with such an overscheduling and zillion of threads, the
> latter is I/O dominated usually taking so little RAM it doesn't
> matter, the memory accesses on the kernel side and DMA issue should
> dominate it in CPU utilization). Similar issue for filesystem
> benchmarks like fio.
> 
> On all _system_ time dominated kernel benchmarks it is expected not to
> measure a performance optimization and if you don't measure a
> regression it's more than enough.
> 
> The only benchmarks that gets benefit are userland where the user/nice
> time in top dominates. AutoNUMA cannot optimize or move kernel memory
> around, it only optimizes userland computations.
> 
> So you should run HPC jobs. The only strange thing here is that
> specjbb2005 gets a measurable significant boost with AutoNUMA so if
> you didn't even get a boost with that you may want to verify:
> 
> cat /sys/kernel/mm/autonuma/enabled == 1
> 
> Also verify:
> 
> CONFIG_AUTONUMA_DEFAULT_ENABLED=y
> 
> If that's 1 well maybe the memory interconnect is so fast that there's
> no benefit?
> 
> My numa01/02 benchmarks measures the best worst case of the hardware
> (not software), with -DINVERSE_BIND -DHARD_BIND parameters, you can
> consider running that to verify.


Could you like to give a url for the benchmarks?

> 
> Probably there should be a little boot time kernel benchmark to
> measure the inverse bind vs hard bind performance across the first two
> nodes, if the difference is nil AutoNUMA should disengage and not even
> allocate the page_autonuma (now only 12 bytes per page but anyway).
> 
> If you can retest with autonuma17 it would help too as there was some
> performance issue fixed and it'd stress the new autonuma migration lru
> code:
> 
> git clone --reference linux -b autonuma17 git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrea/aa.git autonuma17
> 
> And the very latest is always at the autonuma branch:
> 
> git clone --reference linux -b autonuma git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andrea/aa.git autonuma


I got the commit till 2c7535e100805d. and retested specjbb2005 with
jrockit and openjdk again on my Romely EP(2P * 8 cores * HT, with 64GB
memory). find the openjdk has about 2% regression, while jrockit has no
clear change.


the testing user 2 instances, each of them are pinned to a node. some
setting is here:
  per_jvm_warehouse_rampup = 3.0
  per_jvm_warehouse_rampdown = 20.0
  jvm_instances = 2
  deterministic_random_seed = false
  ramp_up_seconds = 30
  measurement_seconds = 240
  starting_number_warehouses = 1
  increment_number_warehouses = 1
  ending_number_warehouses = 34
  expected_peak_warehouse = 16

openjdk
java options:
-Xmx8g -Xms8g -Xincgc

jrockit use hugetlb and its options:
-Xmx8g -Xms8g -Xns4g -XXaggressive -Xlargepages -XXlazyUnlocking
-Xgc:genpar -XXtlasize:min=16k,preferred=64k

> 
> Thanks,
> Andrea


--
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