All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider@arm.com>
Cc: 0day robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkp@lists.01.org, ying.huang@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com,
	zhengjun.xing@intel.com,
	Lingutla Chandrasekhar <clingutla@codeaurora.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Morten Rasmussen <morten.rasmussen@arm.com>,
	Qais Yousef <qais.yousef@arm.com>,
	Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>,
	Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@codeaurora.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
	aubrey.li@linux.intel.com, yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [sched/fair]  38ac256d1c:  stress-ng.vm-segv.ops_per_sec -13.8% regression
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:20:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421032022.GA13430@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87im4on5u5.mognet@arm.com>

hi, Valentin Schneider,

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 06:17:38PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 14/04/21 13:21, kernel test robot wrote:
> > Greeting,
> >
> > FYI, we noticed a -13.8% regression of stress-ng.vm-segv.ops_per_sec due to commit:
> >
> >
> > commit: 38ac256d1c3e6b5155071ed7ba87db50a40a4b58 ("[PATCH v5 1/3] sched/fair: Ignore percpu threads for imbalance pulls")
> > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Valentin-Schneider/sched-fair-load-balance-vs-capacity-margins/20210408-060830
> > base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git 0a2b65c03e9b47493e1442bf9c84badc60d9bffb
> >
> > in testcase: stress-ng
> > on test machine: 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 192G memory
> > with following parameters:
> >
> >       nr_threads: 10%
> >       disk: 1HDD
> >       testtime: 60s
> >       fs: ext4
> >       class: os
> >       test: vm-segv
> >       cpufreq_governor: performance
> >       ucode: 0x5003006
> >
> >
> 
> That's almost exactly the same result as [1], which is somewhat annoying
> for me because I wasn't able to reproduce those results back then. Save
> from scrounging the exact same machine to try this out, I'm not sure what's
> the best way forward. I guess I can re-run the workload on whatever
> machines I have and try to spot any potentially problematic pattern in the
> trace...

what's the machine model you used upon which the regression cannot be reproduced?
we could check if we have similar model then re-check on the our machine.

BTW, we supplied perf data in original report, not sure if they are helpful?
or do you have suggestion which kind of data will be more helpful to you?
we will continuously improve our report based on suggestions from community.
Thanks a lot!

> 
> [1]: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20210223023004.GB25487@xsang-OptiPlex-9020

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oliver Sang <oliver.sang@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [sched/fair] 38ac256d1c: stress-ng.vm-segv.ops_per_sec -13.8% regression
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 11:20:22 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210421032022.GA13430@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87im4on5u5.mognet@arm.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1893 bytes --]

hi, Valentin Schneider,

On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 06:17:38PM +0100, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> On 14/04/21 13:21, kernel test robot wrote:
> > Greeting,
> >
> > FYI, we noticed a -13.8% regression of stress-ng.vm-segv.ops_per_sec due to commit:
> >
> >
> > commit: 38ac256d1c3e6b5155071ed7ba87db50a40a4b58 ("[PATCH v5 1/3] sched/fair: Ignore percpu threads for imbalance pulls")
> > url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Valentin-Schneider/sched-fair-load-balance-vs-capacity-margins/20210408-060830
> > base: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git 0a2b65c03e9b47493e1442bf9c84badc60d9bffb
> >
> > in testcase: stress-ng
> > on test machine: 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 192G memory
> > with following parameters:
> >
> >       nr_threads: 10%
> >       disk: 1HDD
> >       testtime: 60s
> >       fs: ext4
> >       class: os
> >       test: vm-segv
> >       cpufreq_governor: performance
> >       ucode: 0x5003006
> >
> >
> 
> That's almost exactly the same result as [1], which is somewhat annoying
> for me because I wasn't able to reproduce those results back then. Save
> from scrounging the exact same machine to try this out, I'm not sure what's
> the best way forward. I guess I can re-run the workload on whatever
> machines I have and try to spot any potentially problematic pattern in the
> trace...

what's the machine model you used upon which the regression cannot be reproduced?
we could check if we have similar model then re-check on the our machine.

BTW, we supplied perf data in original report, not sure if they are helpful?
or do you have suggestion which kind of data will be more helpful to you?
we will continuously improve our report based on suggestions from community.
Thanks a lot!

> 
> [1]: http://lore.kernel.org/r/20210223023004.GB25487(a)xsang-OptiPlex-9020

  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-21  3:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-07 22:06 [PATCH v5 0/3] sched/fair: load-balance vs capacity margins Valentin Schneider
2021-04-07 22:06 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] sched/fair: Ignore percpu threads for imbalance pulls Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 11:24   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2021-04-09 12:05   ` tip-bot2 for Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2021-04-09 16:14   ` tip-bot2 for Lingutla Chandrasekhar
2021-04-14  5:21   ` [sched/fair] 38ac256d1c: stress-ng.vm-segv.ops_per_sec -13.8% regression kernel test robot
2021-04-14  5:21     ` kernel test robot
2021-04-14 17:17     ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-14 17:17       ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-21  3:20       ` Oliver Sang [this message]
2021-04-21  3:20         ` Oliver Sang
2021-04-21 10:27         ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-21 10:27           ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-21 12:03           ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-21 12:03             ` Peter Zijlstra
2021-04-22  7:47           ` Oliver Sang
2021-04-22  7:47             ` Oliver Sang
2021-04-22  9:55             ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-22  9:55               ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-22 20:42               ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-22 20:42                 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-28 22:00                 ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-28 22:00                   ` Valentin Schneider
2021-05-06 16:11                   ` Valentin Schneider
2021-05-06 16:11                     ` Valentin Schneider
2021-04-07 22:06 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] sched/fair: Clean up active balance nr_balance_failed trickery Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 11:24   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 12:05   ` tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 16:14   ` tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider
2021-04-07 22:06 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] sched/fair: Introduce a CPU capacity comparison helper Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 11:24   ` [tip: sched/core] " tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 12:05   ` tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider
2021-04-09 16:14   ` tip-bot2 for Valentin Schneider

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210421032022.GA13430@xsang-OptiPlex-9020 \
    --to=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=clingutla@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=dietmar.eggemann@arm.com \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=morten.rasmussen@arm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=pkondeti@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=qais.yousef@arm.com \
    --cc=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=valentin.schneider@arm.com \
    --cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
    --cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=zhengjun.xing@intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.