| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5159157F.7060605@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2013 13:05:03 +0800 From: Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com> CC: mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, arjan@...ux.intel.com, bp@...en8.de, pjt@...gle.com, namhyung@...nel.org, efault@....de, vincent.guittot@...aro.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, viresh.kumar@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch v6 0/21] sched: power aware scheduling On 03/30/2013 10:34 PM, Alex Shi wrote: [snip] > > Some performance testing results: > --------------------------------- > > Tested benchmarks: kbuild, specjbb2005, oltp, tbench, aim9, > hackbench, fileio-cfq of sysbench, dbench, aiostress, multhreads > loopback netperf. on my core2, nhm, wsm, snb, platforms. Hi, Alex I've tested the patch on my 12 cpu X86 box with 3.9.0-rc2, here is the results of pgbench (a rough test with little float): base performance powersaving | db_size | clients | tps | | tps | | tps | +---------+---------+-------+ +-------+ +-------+ | 22 MB | 1 | 10662 | | 10497 | | 10124 | | 22 MB | 2 | 21483 | | 21398 | | 17400 | | 22 MB | 4 | 42046 | | 41974 | | 33473 | | 22 MB | 8 | 55807 | | 53504 | | 45320 | | 22 MB | 12 | 50768 | | 49657 | | 47469 | | 22 MB | 16 | 49880 | | 49189 | | 48328 | | 22 MB | 24 | 45904 | | 45870 | | 44756 | | 22 MB | 32 | 43420 | | 44183 | | 43552 | | 7484 MB | 1 | 7965 | | 9045 | | 8221 | | 7484 MB | 2 | 19354 | | 19593 | | 14525 | | 7484 MB | 4 | 37552 | | 37459 | | 28348 | | 7484 MB | 8 | 48655 | | 46974 | | 42360 | | 7484 MB | 12 | 45778 | | 45410 | | 43800 | | 7484 MB | 16 | 45659 | | 44303 | | 42265 | | 7484 MB | 24 | 42192 | | 40571 | | 39197 | | 7484 MB | 32 | 36385 | | 36535 | | 36066 | | 15 GB | 1 | 7677 | | 7362 | | 8075 | | 15 GB | 2 | 19227 | | 19033 | | 14796 | | 15 GB | 4 | 37335 | | 37186 | | 28923 | | 15 GB | 8 | 48130 | | 50232 | | 42281 | | 15 GB | 12 | 45393 | | 44266 | | 42763 | | 15 GB | 16 | 45110 | | 43973 | | 42647 | | 15 GB | 24 | 41415 | | 39389 | | 38844 | | 15 GB | 32 | 35988 | | 36175 | | 35247 | For the performance one, a bit win here and a bit lost there, well, since little float is there, I think at least, no regression. But the powersaving one suffered some regression in low-end, is that the sacrifice we supposed to do for power saving? Regards, Michael Wang > > results: > A, no clear performance change found on 'performance' policy. > B, specjbb2005 drop 5~7% on both of policy whenever with openjdk or > jrockit on powersaving polocy > C, hackbench drops 40% with powersaving policy on snb 4 sockets platforms. > Others has no clear change. > > === > Changelog: > V6 change: > a, remove 'balance' policy. > b, consider RT task effect in balancing > c, use avg_idle as burst wakeup indicator > d, balance on task utilization in fork/exec/wakeup. > e, no power balancing on SMT domain. > > V5 change: > a, change sched_policy to sched_balance_policy > b, split fork/exec/wake power balancing into 3 patches and refresh > commit logs > c, others minors clean up > > V4 change: > a, fix few bugs and clean up code according to Morten Rasmussen, Mike > Galbraith and Namhyung Kim. Thanks! > b, take Morten Rasmussen's suggestion to use different criteria for > different policy in transitory task packing. > c, shorter latency in power aware scheduling. > > V3 change: > a, engaged nr_running and utilisation in periodic power balancing. > b, try packing small exec/wake tasks on running cpu not idle cpu. > > V2 change: > a, add lazy power scheduling to deal with kbuild like benchmark. > > > -- Thanks Alex > [patch v6 01/21] Revert "sched: Introduce temporary FAIR_GROUP_SCHED > [patch v6 02/21] sched: set initial value of runnable avg for new > [patch v6 03/21] sched: only count runnable avg on cfs_rq's > [patch v6 04/21] sched: add sched balance policies in kernel > [patch v6 05/21] sched: add sysfs interface for sched_balance_policy > [patch v6 06/21] sched: log the cpu utilization at rq > [patch v6 07/21] sched: add new sg/sd_lb_stats fields for incoming > [patch v6 08/21] sched: move sg/sd_lb_stats struct ahead > [patch v6 09/21] sched: scale_rt_power rename and meaning change > [patch v6 10/21] sched: get rq potential maximum utilization > [patch v6 11/21] sched: detect wakeup burst with rq->avg_idle > [patch v6 12/21] sched: add power aware scheduling in fork/exec/wake > [patch v6 13/21] sched: using avg_idle to detect bursty wakeup > [patch v6 14/21] sched: packing transitory tasks in wakeup power > [patch v6 15/21] sched: add power/performance balance allow flag > [patch v6 16/21] sched: pull all tasks from source group > [patch v6 17/21] sched: no balance for prefer_sibling in power > [patch v6 18/21] sched: add new members of sd_lb_stats > [patch v6 19/21] sched: power aware load balance > [patch v6 20/21] sched: lazy power balance > [patch v6 21/21] sched: don't do power balance on share cpu power > -- > 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/ > -- 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