[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1348543235.7100.44.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 05:20:35 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Nikolay Ulyanitsky <lystor@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andreas Herrmann <andreas.herrmann3@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>
Subject: Re: 20% performance drop on PostgreSQL 9.2 from kernel 3.5.3 to
3.6-rc5 on AMD chipsets - bisected
On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 20:10 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 7:49 PM, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de> wrote:
> >
> > Ah. That's what I did to select_idle_sibling() in a nutshell, converted
> > the problematic large L3 packages into multiple ~core2duo pairs, modulo
> > shared L2 'course. Bounce proof, and on Westmere, the jabbering back
> > and forth in L3 somehow doesn't hurt as much as expected, so the things
> > act (more or less, L2 traffic _does_ matter;) like the real deal.
>
> Right. But your patch *only* looked at the pair.
>
> Which may be bounce-proof, but we also saw that it was unacceptable.
Yes. Cross wiring traverse _start_ points should eliminate (well, damp)
bounce as well without killing the 1:N latency/preempt benefits of large
L3 packages. You'll still take a lot of L2 misses while doing futile
traverse when fully committed, but that's a separate issue.
-Mike
--
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