[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150624090142.GJ3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 11:01:42 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>, oleg@...hat.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tj@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, der.herr@...r.at, dave@...olabs.net,
riel@...hat.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, jlayton@...chiereds.net
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/13] percpu rwsem -v2
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:46:48AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > flock02
> > > > mean variance sigma max min
> > > > tip-1 11.8994 0.5874 0.7664 13.2022 8.6324
> > > > tip-2 11.7394 0.5252 0.7247 13.2540 9.7513
> > > > tip-3 11.8155 0.5288 0.7272 13.2700 9.9480
> > > > tip+percpu-rswem-1 15.3601 0.8981 0.9477 16.8116 12.6910
> > > > tip+percpu-rswem-2 15.2558 0.8442 0.9188 17.0199 12.9586
> > > > tip+percpu-rswem-3 15.5297 0.6386 0.7991 17.4392 12.7992
> [ Such high variance is often caused by (dynamically) unstable load balancing and
> the workload never finding a good equilibrium. Any observable locking overhead
> is usually just a second order concern or a symptom. Assuming the workload
> context switches heavily. ]
flock02 is a relatively stable benchmark -- unlike some of the others
where the variance is orders of magnitude higher than the avg.
But yes, I'll go poke at it more. I just need to hunt down unrelated
fail before continuing with this.
--
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