[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150623130114.GD32412@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 18:31:14 +0530
From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched:Consider imbalance_pct when comparing loads
in numa_has_capacity
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> [2015-06-23 10:10:39]:
> > Please let me know if there are any better ways to observe the
> > spread. [...]
>
> There are. I see you are using prehistoric tooling, but see the various NUMA
> convergence latency measurement utilities in 'perf bench numa':
>
> vega:~> cat numa01-THREAD_ALLOC
>
> perf bench numa mem --no-data_rand_walk -p 2 -t 16 -G 0 -P 0 -T 192 -l 1000 -zZ0c $@
>
> You can generate very flexible setups of NUMA access patterns, and measure their
> behavior accurately.
>
> It's all so much more capable and more flexible than autonumabench ...
Okay, thanks for the hint, I will try this out in future.
>
> Also, when you are trying to report numbers for multiple runs, please use
> something like:
>
> perf stat --null --repeat 3 ...
>
> This will run the workload 3 times (doing only time measurement) and report the
> stddev in a human readable form.
>
Thanks again for this hint. Wouldnt system time/ user time also matter?
I guess once Mel did point out that it was important to make sure that
system time and user time dont increase when elapsed time decreases. But
I cant find the email though.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju
--
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