linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: smart wake-affine

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: <1373867877.2072.2.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date:	Sun, 14 Jul 2013 22:57:57 -0700
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>
To:	Michael Wang <wangyun@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Alex Shi <alex.shi@...el.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
	Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Ram Pai <linuxram@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: smart wake-affine

On Mon, 2013-07-15 at 13:13 +0800, Michael Wang wrote:
> Hi, Davidlohr
> 
> On 07/09/2013 10:52 AM, Michael Wang wrote:
> > On 07/09/2013 10:36 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>> 2. is the 3.10-rc5 in image also disabled the hyperthreading?
> >>
> >> Yes, I happened to have data already collected for 3.10-rc5. While the
> >> runs with this patch was with -rc7, unless there was some performance
> >> related commit I missed, I don't think the performance difference was
> >> because of that.
> >>
> >>> 3. is the v3 patch set show the same issue?
> >>
> >> Uhmmm shoot, I didn't realize there was a v3, sorry about that.
> >>
> >> /me takes another look at the thread.
> > 
> > V3 will reduce the overhead, should make things better, especially when
> > workload is high and platform is big (your box is really what I desired
> > ;-), honestly).
> > 
> > And if it is possible, comparison based on the same basement will be
> > better :)
> 
> I have done some tests with reaim high_systime workfile, and I could not
> find regression on my box (the tool itself has some issue, but I got the
> results), v3 works well.

Sorry for the delay. I'm glad you reminded me since I already had the
data.
> 
> I suppose the issue have been addressed, but please let us know if v3
> also show regression on your box, we could try to solve the problem ;-)

It has, high_systime no longer shows a hit and all workloads remain
basically the same.

Tested-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>

Thanks.

> 
> Regards,
> Michael Wang
> 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Michael Wang
> > 
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Davidlohr
> >>
> > 
> > --
> > 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/