[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230601115643.GX4253@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 13:56:43 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Gautham Shenoy <gautham.shenoy@....com>
Subject: Re: [tip: sched/core] sched/fair: Multi-LLC select_idle_sibling()
On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 01:13:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> This DeathStarBench thing seems to suggest that scanning up to 4 CCDs
> isn't too much of a bother; so perhaps something like so?
>
> (on top of tip/sched/core from just a few hours ago, as I had to 'fix'
> this patch and force pushed the thing)
>
> And yeah, random hacks and heuristics here :/ Does there happen to be
> additional topology that could aid us here? Does the CCD fabric itself
> have a distance metric we can use?
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16529/amd-epyc-milan-review/4
Specifically:
https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16529/Bounce-7763.png
That seems to suggest there are some very minor distance effects in the
CCD fabric. I didn't read the article too closely, but you'll note that
the first 4 CCDs have inter-CCD latency < 100 while the rest has > 100.
Could you also test on a Zen2 Epyc, does that require nr=8 instead of 4?
Should we perhaps write it like: 32 / llc_size ?
The Zen2 picture:
https://images.anandtech.com/doci/16315/Bounce-7742.png
Shows a more pronounced CCD fabric topology, you can really see the 2
CCX inside the CCD but also there's two ligher green squares around the
CCDs themselves.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists