[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <579b7ea34ef6e2f7c955abdfc0929fe1af36faef.camel@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2024 06:58:59 +0200
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, dietmar.eggemann@....com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
bsegall@...gle.com, mgorman@...e.de, vschneid@...hat.com,
ankur.a.arora@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] sched: Lazy preemption muck
On Mon, 2024-10-07 at 09:46 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Hi!
>
> During LPC Thomas reminded me that the lazy preemption stuff was not there yet.
>
> So here goes, robot says it builds, and I checked both a regular and PREEMPT_RT
> build boots and can change the mode.
>
> Please have a poke.
My box seems content.
I'm gonna miss VOLATILE (voluntary;) when it's eventually whacked, but
not a lot.. or at all general case, security and whatnot over time have
beaten up high end switchers far worse.
tbench 8 30s - single run, box=i7-4790
master static
voluntary 3620.45 MB/sec 1.000 mean3 3613.45 stddev3 14.08
voluntary 2706.54 MB/sec .747 +cpu_mitigations
voluntary 4028.72 MB/sec 1.112 nostalgia (4.4.231)
preempt 3449.35 MB/sec .952
none 3631.99 MB/sec 1.003
master dynamic
none 3548.19 MB/sec .980
voluntary 3495.77 MB/sec .965
full 3476.50 MB/sec .960
lazy 3473.95 MB/sec .959
laziest 3492.09 MB/sec .964
master dynamic rt
full 2352.58 MB/sec .649
lazy 2986.28 MB/sec .824
laziest 2977.63 MB/sec .822
distro kernel dynamic
none 1744.51 MB/sec .481
none 2189.74 MB/sec .604 mitigations=off
Powered by blists - more mailing lists