| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <9af4bb66-83c4-4257-bfc3-dbcb2185a7e6@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2025 03:04:31 -0700
From: Libo Chen <libo.chen@...cle.com>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
David Vernet <void@...ifault.com>,
"Gautham R. Shenoy"
<gautham.shenoy@....com>,
Swapnil Sapkal <swapnil.sapkal@....com>,
Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] sched/fair: Propagate load balancing stats up the
sched domain hierarchy
On 3/13/25 02:37, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Benchmark results
> =================
>
Hi Prateek,
Definitely like the idea, esp. if we can pull this off on newidle lb
which tends to be more problematic on systems with a large number
of cores. But the data below on periodic lb isn't I guess as good as
I expect. So I am wondering if the cost of update_[sd|sg]_lb_stats()
actually went down as the result of the caching?
Thanks,
Libo
> ==================================================================
> Test : hackbench
> Units : Normalized time in seconds
> Interpretation: Lower is better
> Statistic : AMean
> ==================================================================
> Case: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1-groups 1.00 [ -0.00](10.12) 1.09 [ -9.11](11.93)
> 2-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.92) 1.00 [ -0.22]( 4.57)
> 4-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.14) 0.99 [ 0.83]( 1.77)
> 8-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.35) 1.00 [ -0.31]( 2.24)
> 16-groups 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.32) 0.99 [ 0.84]( 0.67)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : tbench
> Units : Normalized throughput
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : AMean
> ==================================================================
> Clients: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.43) 0.99 [ -0.87]( 1.34)
> 2 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.58) 1.02 [ 2.14]( 0.29)
> 4 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.54) 1.01 [ 1.24]( 0.82)
> 8 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.49) 1.01 [ 0.62]( 0.97)
> 16 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.06) 1.01 [ 0.94]( 0.70)
> 32 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.27) 0.99 [ -1.24]( 1.38)
> 64 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.54) 1.00 [ -0.43]( 0.36)
> 128 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.38) 1.00 [ -0.01]( 1.22)
> 256 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.85) 1.02 [ 1.58]( 0.90)
> 512 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.31) 1.01 [ 0.76]( 1.19)
> 1024 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.19) 1.00 [ 0.44]( 0.35)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : stream-10
> Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : HMean
> ==================================================================
> Test: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> Copy 1.00 [ 0.00](11.31) 1.02 [ 1.69]( 6.44)
> Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 6.62) 1.01 [ 0.80]( 5.37)
> Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 7.06) 1.02 [ 1.54]( 6.72)
> Triad 1.00 [ 0.00]( 8.91) 1.01 [ 1.36]( 6.73)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : stream-100
> Units : Normalized Bandwidth, MB/s
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : HMean
> ==================================================================
> Test: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> Copy 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.01) 0.98 [ -1.55]( 2.15)
> Scale 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.49) 1.00 [ 0.23]( 0.58)
> Add 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.67) 1.01 [ 0.65]( 1.95)
> Triad 1.00 [ 0.00]( 2.19) 1.01 [ 0.61]( 1.37)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : netperf
> Units : Normalized Througput
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : AMean
> ==================================================================
> Clients: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.43) 1.00 [ 0.17]( 0.32)
> 2-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.02) 1.01 [ 1.00]( 0.44)
> 4-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.83) 1.01 [ 0.62]( 0.36)
> 8-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.73) 1.00 [ -0.11]( 0.65)
> 16-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.97) 1.00 [ 0.49]( 0.77)
> 32-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.88) 1.00 [ 0.30]( 0.94)
> 64-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.49) 1.00 [ 0.36]( 1.57)
> 128-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.05) 1.00 [ 0.14]( 1.46)
> 256-clients 1.00 [ 0.00]( 3.85) 1.00 [ -0.04]( 4.85)
> 512-clients 1.00 [ 0.00](59.63) 1.00 [ -0.02](62.28)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : schbench
> Units : Normalized 99th percentile latency in us
> Interpretation: Lower is better
> Statistic : Median
> ==================================================================
> #workers: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.67) 0.76 [ 24.44](35.80)
> 2 1.00 [ -0.00](10.18) 0.87 [ 13.04](10.38)
> 4 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.49) 1.04 [ -4.26]( 3.14)
> 8 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.68) 0.98 [ 1.89]( 8.07)
> 16 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.87) 1.03 [ -3.28]( 5.21)
> 32 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.01) 0.98 [ 2.20]( 1.31)
> 64 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.21) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.23)
> 128 1.00 [ -0.00](44.13) 1.06 [ -6.43](113.66)
> 256 1.00 [ -0.00](14.46) 1.04 [ -3.52]( 8.43)
> 512 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.95) 1.02 [ -1.80]( 1.14)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : new-schbench-requests-per-second
> Units : Normalized Requests per second
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : Median
> ==================================================================
> #workers: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.46) 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.55)
> 2 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.15) 0.99 [ -0.88]( 0.26)
> 4 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.15) 0.99 [ -0.59]( 0.15)
> 8 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.15) 0.99 [ -0.88]( 0.26)
> 16 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.00) 1.00 [ -0.29]( 0.15)
> 32 1.00 [ 0.00]( 3.40) 1.07 [ 6.59]( 0.16)
> 64 1.00 [ 0.00]( 7.09) 1.00 [ -0.38]( 0.96)
> 128 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.00) 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.20)
> 256 1.00 [ 0.00]( 1.12) 1.00 [ -0.30]( 1.50)
> 512 1.00 [ 0.00]( 0.22) 1.05 [ 4.86]( 0.71)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : new-schbench-wakeup-latency
> Units : Normalized 99th percentile latency in us
> Interpretation: Lower is better
> Statistic : Median
> ==================================================================
> #workers: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1 1.00 [ -0.00](19.72) 0.85 [ 15.38](16.75)
> 2 1.00 [ -0.00](15.96) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.00)
> 4 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.87) 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.08)
> 8 1.00 [ -0.00]( 8.15) 1.00 [ -0.00](11.71)
> 16 1.00 [ -0.00]( 3.87) 0.92 [ 7.69]( 4.19)
> 32 1.00 [ -0.00](12.99) 0.73 [ 26.67]( 0.00)
> 64 1.00 [ -0.00]( 6.20) 1.12 [-12.50]( 9.94)
> 128 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.96) 0.98 [ 1.55]( 0.95)
> 256 1.00 [ -0.00]( 2.76) 0.99 [ 1.45]( 1.38)
> 512 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.20) 1.20 [-20.42]( 0.00)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : new-schbench-request-latency
> Units : Normalized 99th percentile latency in us
> Interpretation: Lower is better
> Statistic : Median
> ==================================================================
> #workers: tip[pct imp](CV) stats_prop[pct imp](CV)
> 1 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.07) 1.02 [ -2.08]( 0.13)
> 2 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.14) 1.04 [ -3.97]( 0.13)
> 4 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.39) 1.03 [ -3.15]( 0.13)
> 8 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.36) 1.03 [ -3.16]( 0.00)
> 16 1.00 [ -0.00]( 1.18) 1.02 [ -1.59]( 0.75)
> 32 1.00 [ -0.00]( 8.42) 0.81 [ 19.08]( 0.25)
> 64 1.00 [ -0.00]( 4.85) 1.01 [ -1.10]( 2.58)
> 128 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.28) 1.00 [ -0.21]( 0.38)
> 256 1.00 [ -0.00](10.52) 0.95 [ 4.74]( 6.94)
> 512 1.00 [ -0.00]( 0.69) 1.09 [ -8.99]( 0.27)
>
>
> ==================================================================
> Test : Various longer running benchmarks
> Units : %diff in throughput reported
> Interpretation: Higher is better
> Statistic : Median
> ==================================================================
> Benchmarks: %diff
>
> ycsb-cassandra -0.54%
> ycsb-mongodb 0.09%
>
> deathstarbench-1x -0.30%
> deathstarbench-2x 2.38%
> deathstarbench-3x 0.58%
> deathstarbench-6x 0.62%
>
> hammerdb+mysql 16VU 0.76%
> hammerdb+mysql 64VU 0.74%
> ---
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists