[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180531092619.GS12198@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 11:26:19 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Subhra Mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
daniel.lezcano@...aro.org, steven.sistare@...cle.com,
dhaval.giani@...cle.com, rohit.k.jain@...cle.com,
Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sched: remove select_idle_core() for scalability
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 03:08:21PM -0700, Subhra Mazumdar wrote:
> I tested with FOLD+AGE+ONCE+PONIES+PONIES2 shift=0 vs baseline but see some
> regression for hackbench and uperf:
I'm not seeing a hackbench regression myself, but I let it run a whole
lot of stuff over-night and I do indeed see some pain points, including
sysbench-mysql and some schbench results.
> I have a patch which is much smaller but seems to work well so far for both
> x86 and SPARC across benchmarks I have run so far. It keeps the idle cpu
> search between 1 core and 2 core amount of cpus and also puts a new
> sched feature of doing idle core search or not. It can be on by default but
> for workloads (like Oracle DB on x86) we can turn it off. I plan to send
> that after some more testing.
Sure thing..
Powered by blists - more mailing lists