[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1505813678.16495.5.camel@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 15:04:38 +0530
From: Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: acme@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org
Cc: srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, bala24@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Fixup for discontiguous/sparse numa nodes
Hi Arnaldo,
Please let me know if any further comments.
Thanks in advance :-)
Regards,
-Satheesh.On Mon, 2017-08-21 at 15:45 +0530, sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com wrote:
> From: Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Certain systems would have sparse/discontinguous
> numa nodes.
> perf bench numa doesnt work well on such nodes.
> 1. It shows wrong values.
> 2. It can hang.
> 3. It can show redundant information for non-existant nodes.
>
> #numactl -H
> available: 2 nodes (0,8)
> node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
> node 0 size: 61352 MB
> node 0 free: 57168 MB
> node 8 cpus: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
> node 8 size: 65416 MB
> node 8 free: 36593 MB
> node distances:
> node 0 8
> 0: 10 40
> 8: 40 10
>
> Scenario 1:
>
> Before Fix:
> # perf bench numa mem --no-data_rand_walk -p 2 -t 20 -G 0 -P 3072 -T
> 0 -l 50 -c -s 1000
> ...
> ...
> # 40 tasks will execute (on 9 nodes, 16 CPUs): ----> Wrong number of
> nodes
> ...
> # 2.0% [0.2
> mins] 1/1 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 4/1 [ 4/2 ]
> l: 0-0 ( 0) ----> Shows info on non-existant nodes.
>
> After Fix:
> # ./perf bench numa mem --no-data_rand_walk -p 2 -t 20 -G 0 -P 3072
> -T 0 -l 50 -c -s 1000
> ...
> ...
> # 40 tasks will execute (on 2 nodes, 16 CPUs):
> ...
> # 2.0% [0.2 mins] 9/1 0/0 [ 9/1 ] l: 0-0 ( 0)
> # 4.0% [0.4 mins] 21/2 19/1 [ 2/3 ] l: 0-1 ( 1) {1-2}
>
> Scenario 2:
>
> Before Fix:
> # perf bench numa all
> # Running numa/mem benchmark...
> ....
> ...
> # Running RAM-bw-remote, "perf bench numa mem -p 1 -t 1 -P 1024 -C 0
> -M 1 -s 20 -zZq --thp 1 --no-data_rand_walk"
> perf: bench/numa.c:306: bind_to_memnode: Assertion `!(ret)' failed.
> ------------> Got hung
>
> After Fix:
> # ./perf bench numa all
> # Running numa/mem benchmark...
> ....
> ...
> # Running RAM-bw-remote, "perf bench numa mem -p 1 -t 1 -P 1024 -C 0
> -M 1 -s 20 -zZq --thp 1 --no-data_rand_walk"
>
> # NOTE: ignoring bind NODEs starting at NODE#1
> # NOTE: 0 tasks mem-bound, 1 tasks unbound
> 20.017 secs slowest (max) thread-runtime
> 20.000 secs fastest (min) thread-runtime
> 20.006 secs average thread-runtime
> 0.043 % difference between max/avg runtime
> 413.794 GB data processed, per thread
> 413.794 GB data processed, total
> 0.048 nsecs/byte/thread runtime
> 20.672 GB/sec/thread speed
> 20.672 GB/sec total speed
>
> Changes in v2:
> Fixed review comments for function names and alloc failure handle
>
> Changes in v3:
> Coding Style fixes.
>
>
> Satheesh Rajendran (2):
> perf/bench/numa: Add functions to detect sparse numa nodes
> perf/bench/numa: Handle discontiguous/sparse numa nodes
>
> tools/perf/bench/numa.c | 61
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists