linux-kernel - Re: [GIT TREE] Unified NUMA balancing tree, v3

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1212101902050.4422@ionos>
Date:	Mon, 10 Dec 2012 19:22:37 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT TREE] Unified NUMA balancing tree, v3

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> The SPECjbb 4x JVM numbers are still very close to the
> hard-binding results:
> 
>   Fri Dec  7 02:08:42 CET 2012
>   spec1.txt:           throughput =     188667.94 SPECjbb2005 bops
>   spec2.txt:           throughput =     190109.31 SPECjbb2005 bops
>   spec3.txt:           throughput =     191438.13 SPECjbb2005 bops
>   spec4.txt:           throughput =     192508.34 SPECjbb2005 bops
>                                       --------------------------
>         SUM:           throughput =     762723.72 SPECjbb2005 bops
> 
> And the same is true for !THP as well.

I could not resist to throw all relevant trees on my own 4node machine
and run a SPECjbb 4x JVM comparison. All results have been averaged
over 10 runs.

mainline:	v3.7-rc8
autonuma:	mm-autonuma-v28fastr4-mels-rebase
balancenuma:	mm-balancenuma-v10r3
numacore:	Unified NUMA balancing tree, v3

The config is based on a F16 config with CONFIG_PREEMPT_NONE=y and the
relevant NUMA options enabled for the 4 trees.

THP off: manual placement result:     125239

		Auto result	Man/Auto	Mainline/Auto	Variance
mainline    :	     93945	0.750		1.000		 5.91%
autonuma    :	    123651	0.987		1.316		 5.15%
balancenuma :	     97327	0.777		1.036		 5.19%
numacore    :	    123009	0.982		1.309		 5.73%


THP on: manual placement result:     143170

		Auto result	Auto/Manual	Auto/Mainline	Variance
mainline    :	    104462	0.730		1.000		 8.47%
autonuma    :	    137363	0.959		1.315		 5.81%
balancenuma :	    112183	0.784		1.074		11.58%
numacore    :	    142728	0.997		1.366		 2.94%

So autonuma and numacore are basically on the same page, with a slight
advantage for numacore in the THP enabled case. balancenuma is closer
to mainline than to autonuma/numacore.

Thanks,

	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/