[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180130131859.rvhobozd5lvt6hs5@techsingularity.net>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 13:18:59 +0000
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] sched/fair: Use a recently used CPU as an idle
candidate and the basis for SIS
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 02:06:06PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 12:53:49PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:45:55AM +0000, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > The results can be less dramatic on NUMA where automatic balancing interferes
> > > with the test. It's also known that network benchmarks running on localhost
> > > also benefit quite a bit from this patch (roughly 10% on netperf RR for UDP
> > > and TCP depending on the machine). Hackbench also seens small improvements
> > > (6-11% depending on machine and thread count). The facebook schbench was also
> > > tested but in most cases showed little or no different to wakeup latencies.
> >
> > What cpufreq setting were you using for these tests?
>
> I cannot measure any hackbench variation one way or the other with these
> patches using 'performance' mode. So I'll assume you've been running
> things with HWP or something.
Correct, I am not using the performance governor as it's not the default and
not necessarily desirable as a default. HWP in some cases is enabled but
even machines using the intel_pstate driver on machines without HWP benefit.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists