[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87bmdynnv4.fsf@e105922-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2018 15:17:19 +0100
From: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@....com>
To: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
kirill@...temov.name, ak@...ux.intel.com, dave@...olabs.net,
jack@...e.cz, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, mpe@...erman.id.au, paulus@...ba.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, hpa@...or.com,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
kemi.wang@...el.com, sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
Ganesh Mahendran <opensource.ganesh@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
haren@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
npiggin@...il.com, bsingharora@...il.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/25] Speculative page faults
Hi Laurent,
One query below -
Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
[...]
>
> Ebizzy:
> -------
> The test is counting the number of records per second it can manage, the
> higher is the best. I run it like this 'ebizzy -mTRp'. To get consistent
> result I repeated the test 100 times and measure the average result. The
> number is the record processes per second, the higher is the best.
>
> BASE SPF delta
> 16 CPUs x86 VM 12405.52 91104.52 634.39%
> 80 CPUs P8 node 37880.01 76201.05 101.16%
How do you measure the number of records processed? Is there a specific
version of ebizzy that reports this? I couldn't find a way to get this
information with the ebizzy that's included in ltp.
>
> Here are the performance counter read during a run on a 16 CPUs x86 VM:
> Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -mRTp':
> 860074 faults
> 856866 spf
> 285 pagefault:spf_pte_lock
> 1506 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
> 73 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>
> And the ones captured during a run on a 80 CPUs Power node:
> Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -mRTp':
> 722695 faults
> 699402 spf
> 16048 pagefault:spf_pte_lock
> 6838 pagefault:spf_vma_changed
> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_noanon
> 277 pagefault:spf_vma_notsup
> 0 pagefault:spf_vma_access
> 0 pagefault:spf_pmd_changed
>
> In ebizzy's case most of the page fault were handled in a speculative way,
> leading the ebizzy performance boost.
A trial run showed increased fault handling when SPF is enabled on an
8-core ARM64 system running 4.17-rc3. I am using a port of your x86
patch to enable spf on arm64.
SPF
---
Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -vvvmTRp':
1,322,736 faults
1,299,241 software/config=11/
10.005348034 seconds time elapsed
No SPF
-----
Performance counter stats for './ebizzy -vvvmTRp':
708,916 faults
0 software/config=11/
10.005807432 seconds time elapsed
Thanks,
Punit
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists