From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S935599Ab3BOHpp (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 02:45:45 -0500 Received: from LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.151]:55924 "EHLO LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935514Ab3BOHpo (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Feb 2013 02:45:44 -0500 X-AuditID: 9c930197-b7ca4ae000006ba8-20-511de7a20fa6 Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 16:45:38 +0900 From: Joonsoo Kim To: Steven Rostedt Cc: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , Frederic Weisbecker , Andrew Morton , Mike Galbraith , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Clark Williams , Andrew Theurer Subject: Re: [RFC] sched: The removal of idle_balance() Message-ID: <20130215074538.GA25845@lge.com> References: <1360908819.23152.97.camel@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1360908819.23152.97.camel@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Steven. On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 01:13:39AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Performance counter stats for '/work/c/hackbench 500' (100 runs): > > 199820.045583 task-clock # 8.016 CPUs utilized ( +- 5.29% ) [100.00%] > 3,594,264 context-switches # 0.018 M/sec ( +- 5.94% ) [100.00%] > 352,240 cpu-migrations # 0.002 M/sec ( +- 3.31% ) [100.00%] > 1,006,732 page-faults # 0.005 M/sec ( +- 0.56% ) > 293,801,912,874 cycles # 1.470 GHz ( +- 4.20% ) [100.00%] > 261,808,125,109 stalled-cycles-frontend # 89.11% frontend cycles idle ( +- 4.38% ) [100.00%] > stalled-cycles-backend > 135,521,344,089 instructions # 0.46 insns per cycle > # 1.93 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 4.37% ) [100.00%] > 26,198,116,586 branches # 131.109 M/sec ( +- 4.59% ) [100.00%] > 115,326,812 branch-misses # 0.44% of all branches ( +- 4.12% ) > > 24.929136087 seconds time elapsed ( +- 5.31% ) > > Performance counter stats for '/work/c/hackbench 500' (100 runs): > > 98258.962617 task-clock # 7.998 CPUs utilized ( +- 12.12% ) [100.00%] > 2,572,651 context-switches # 0.026 M/sec ( +- 9.35% ) [100.00%] > 224,004 cpu-migrations # 0.002 M/sec ( +- 5.01% ) [100.00%] > 913,813 page-faults # 0.009 M/sec ( +- 0.71% ) > 215,927,081,108 cycles # 2.198 GHz ( +- 5.48% ) [100.00%] > 189,246,626,321 stalled-cycles-frontend # 87.64% frontend cycles idle ( +- 6.07% ) [100.00%] > stalled-cycles-backend > 102,965,954,824 instructions # 0.48 insns per cycle > # 1.84 stalled cycles per insn ( +- 5.40% ) [100.00%] > 19,280,914,558 branches # 196.226 M/sec ( +- 5.89% ) [100.00%] > 87,284,617 branch-misses # 0.45% of all branches ( +- 5.06% ) > > 12.285025160 seconds time elapsed ( +- 12.14% ) IMHO, cycles is somewhat strange. Why one is 1.470 GHz, other is 2.198 GHz? In my quick test, I get below result. - Before Patch Permance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 300' (10 runs): 40847.488740 task-clock # 3.232 CPUs utilized ( +- 1.24% ) 511,070 context-switches # 0.013 M/sec ( +- 7.28% ) 117,882 cpu-migrations # 0.003 M/sec ( +- 5.14% ) 1,360,501 page-faults # 0.033 M/sec ( +- 0.12% ) 118,534,394,180 cycles # 2.902 GHz ( +- 1.23% ) [50.70%] stalled-cycles-frontend stalled-cycles-backend 46,217,340,271 instructions # 0.39 insns per cycle ( +- 0.56% ) [76.93%] 8,592,447,548 branches # 210.354 M/sec ( +- 0.75% ) [75.50%] 273,367,481 branch-misses # 3.18% of all branches ( +- 0.26% ) [75.49%] 12.639049245 seconds time elapsed ( +- 2.29% ) - After Patch Performance counter stats for 'perf bench sched messaging -g 300' (10 runs): 42053.008632 task-clock # 2.932 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.91% ) 672,759 context-switches # 0.016 M/sec ( +- 2.76% ) 83,374 cpu-migrations # 0.002 M/sec ( +- 4.46% ) 1,362,900 page-faults # 0.032 M/sec ( +- 0.20% ) 121,457,601,848 cycles # 2.888 GHz ( +- 0.93% ) [50.75%] stalled-cycles-frontend stalled-cycles-backend 47,854,828,552 instructions # 0.39 insns per cycle ( +- 0.36% ) [77.09%] 8,981,553,714 branches # 213.577 M/sec ( +- 0.42% ) [75.41%] 274,229,438 branch-misses # 3.05% of all branches ( +- 0.20% ) [75.44%] 14.340330678 seconds time elapsed ( +- 1.79% ) Thanks.