[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <n3xsvtgidf65f62x3mwgcoxnglflzozxpxjhtvawmvoljo3t6o@kahjwxud5aqf>
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 17:09:31 +0800
From: Hao Li <hao.li@...ux.dev>
To: Zhao Liu <zhao1.liu@...el.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Hao Li <haolee.swjtu@...il.com>,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, harry.yoo@...cle.com, cl@...two.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
roman.gushchin@...ux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tim.c.chen@...el.com, yu.c.chen@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] slub: keep empty main sheaf as spare in
__pcs_replace_empty_main()
On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 05:16:03PM +0800, Zhao Liu wrote:
> > I'd like to dig a bit deeper to confirm whether the "256 tasks" result is truly
> > a regression.
>
> The "256" seems align closely with the NUMA topology on my machine, so
> I'm unsure how it will perform on other machines.
Got it. Thanks, in any case, I'll try to reproduce it first.
>
> > Could you please share the original full report, or let me know
> > which test case under will-it-scale/ you used?
>
> I mainly followed Suneeth's steps [*]:
>
> 1) git clone https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale.git
> 2) git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git
> 3) cd will-it-scale && git apply
> lkp-tests/programs/will-it-scale/pkg/will-it-scale.patch
> 4) make
> 5) python3 runtest.py mmap2 25 process 0 0 1 8 64 128 192 256
>
> [*]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/262c742f-dc0c-4adc-b23c-047cd3298a5e@amd.com/
Thanks!
>
> Sine the raw perf.data files are too big to be blocked, if you need to
> see any specific part of the content, I can paste the info for you.
>
> Regards,
> Zhao
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists