[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wioaHG2P0KH=1zP0Zy=CcQb_JxZrksSS2+-FwcptHtntw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 12:06:44 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
WangYuli <wangyuli@...ontech.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@....com>, Neeraj Upadhyay <Neeraj.Upadhyay@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pipe_read: don't wake up the writer if the pipe is still full
On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 at 01:50, K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com> wrote:
>
> On my 3rd Generation EPYC system (2 x 64C/128T), I see that on reverting
> the changes on the above mentioned commit, sched-messaging sees a
> regression up until the 8 group case which contains 320 tasks, however
> with 16 groups (640 tasks), the revert helps with performance.
I suspect that the extra wakeups just end up perturbing timing, and
then you just randomly get better performance on that particular
test-case and machine.
I'm not sure this is worth worrying about, unless there's a real load
somewhere that shows this regression.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists