From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 838CDC47089 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 12:14:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56DF5611F0 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 12:14:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234928AbhE0MPs (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 08:15:48 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:39284 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233836AbhE0MPr (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 08:15:47 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1622117653; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Ubri0iTXqSbG4njMyHYok09VeFeexWDkKI6v4avoIG4=; b=uz4U3LqIOrgVdW7xvJqCSVErZZkOB8eKU14+17k84gUlYnvW9kIDqoMzqyuB6Pks2mBjn1 0hxpoknVhz1w98liL/fO1195C1bY/29CkbgBHga2cmUU/AKmYmQxDKiBNl2+Pj0dvio7ol K5CsDAJUL6L8A/wrBqV1qD3VSfvIUsg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1622117653; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Ubri0iTXqSbG4njMyHYok09VeFeexWDkKI6v4avoIG4=; b=xwFb2HZ0dLN8bDwk3tUFRPpOkaq/kJiyPzYxKVrmrAU7gHvKkDTFt28l3+SkGyGaVyhdLB U7hacXdAXs1tiSCw== Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03ABBAE39; Thu, 27 May 2021 12:14:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 13:14:09 +0100 From: Mel Gorman To: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" Cc: Peter Zijlstra , "vincent.guittot@linaro.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "dietmar.eggemann@arm.com" , "rostedt@goodmis.org" , "bsegall@google.com" , "valentin.schneider@arm.com" , "juri.lelli@redhat.com" , "bristot@redhat.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "guodong.xu@linaro.org" , yangyicong , tangchengchang , Linuxarm Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: fair: don't depend on wake_wide if waker and wakee are already in same LLC Message-ID: <20210527121409.GK3672@suse.de> References: <20210526091057.1800-1-song.bao.hua@hisilicon.com> <7dd00a98d6454d5e92a7d9b936d1aa1c@hisilicon.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7dd00a98d6454d5e92a7d9b936d1aa1c@hisilicon.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 09:38:19PM +0000, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote: > > And no supportive numbers... > > Sorry for the confusion. > > I actually put some supportive numbers at the below thread which > derived this patch: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/bbc339cef87e4009b6d56ee37e202daf@hisilicon.com/ > > when I tried to give Dietmar some pgbench data in that thread, > I found in kunpeng920, while software ran in one die/numa with > 24cores sharing LLC, disabling wake_wide() brought the best > pgbench result. > > llc_as_factor don't_use_wake_wide > Hmean 1 10869.27 ( 0.00%) 10723.08 * -1.34%* > Hmean 8 19580.59 ( 0.00%) 19469.34 * -0.57%* > Hmean 12 29643.56 ( 0.00%) 29520.16 * -0.42%* > Hmean 24 43194.47 ( 0.00%) 43774.78 * 1.34%* > Hmean 32 40163.23 ( 0.00%) 40742.93 * 1.44%* > Hmean 48 42249.29 ( 0.00%) 48329.00 * 14.39%* > > The test was done by https://github.com/gormanm/mmtests > and > ./run-mmtests.sh --config ./configs/config-db-pgbench-timed-ro-medium test_tag > Out of curiousity, I briefly tested this on a Zen2 machine which also has multiple LLCs per node. Only tbench4 was executed and I cancelled the other tests because of results like this tbench4 5.13.0-rc2 5.13.0-rc2 vanilla sched-nowakewidellc-v1r1 Hmean 1 349.34 ( 0.00%) 334.18 * -4.34%* Hmean 2 668.49 ( 0.00%) 659.12 * -1.40%* Hmean 4 1307.90 ( 0.00%) 1274.35 * -2.57%* Hmean 8 2482.08 ( 0.00%) 2377.84 * -4.20%* Hmean 16 4460.06 ( 0.00%) 4656.28 * 4.40%* Hmean 32 9463.76 ( 0.00%) 8909.61 * -5.86%* Hmean 64 15865.30 ( 0.00%) 19682.77 * 24.06%* Hmean 128 24350.06 ( 0.00%) 21593.20 * -11.32%* Hmean 256 39593.90 ( 0.00%) 31389.33 * -20.72%* Hmean 512 37851.54 ( 0.00%) 30260.23 * -20.06%* -- Mel Gorman SUSE Labs