From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com,
ying.huang@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@intel.com
Subject: Re: [signal] 4bad58ebc8: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -3.3% regression
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:57:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874kfof8un.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210430081359.GB79529@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
Feng,
On Fri, Apr 30 2021 at 16:13, Feng Tang wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:08:37AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> commit:
>> 69995ebbb9 ("signal: Hand SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC flag to __sigqueue_alloc()")
>> 4bad58ebc8 ("signal: Allow tasks to cache one sigqueue struct")
>>
>> 69995ebbb9d37173 4bad58ebc8bc4f20d89cff95417
>> ---------------- ---------------------------
>> %stddev %change %stddev
>> \ | \
>> 1.273e+09 -3.3% 1.231e+09 will-it-scale.192.threads
>> 6630224 -3.3% 6409738 will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
>> 1.273e+09 -3.3% 1.231e+09 will-it-scale.workload
>
> We've double checked this, and it seems to be another case of
> the code alignment change caused regression change, just like
> the other case we debugged " [genirq] cbe16f35be:
> will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.2% regression"
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210428050758.GB52098@shbuild999.sh.intel.com/
>
> With the same debug patch of forcing function address 64 bytes
> aligned, then commit 4bad58ebc8 will bring no change on this case.
>
> commit 09c60546f04f "./Makefile: add debug option to enable function
> aligned on 32 bytes" only forced 32 bytes align, with thinking 64B
> align will occupy more code space, and affect iTLB more. Maybe we
> should just extend it to 64B align, as it is for debug only anyway.
thanks for the heads up!
But why is this restricted to debug mode?
The fact that adding a few bytes of text causes regressions in unrelated
code is not restricted to debug or am I missing something here?
Thanks,
tglx
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [signal] 4bad58ebc8: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -3.3% regression
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 10:57:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <874kfof8un.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210430081359.GB79529@shbuild999.sh.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1708 bytes --]
Feng,
On Fri, Apr 30 2021 at 16:13, Feng Tang wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:08:37AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
>> commit:
>> 69995ebbb9 ("signal: Hand SIGQUEUE_PREALLOC flag to __sigqueue_alloc()")
>> 4bad58ebc8 ("signal: Allow tasks to cache one sigqueue struct")
>>
>> 69995ebbb9d37173 4bad58ebc8bc4f20d89cff95417
>> ---------------- ---------------------------
>> %stddev %change %stddev
>> \ | \
>> 1.273e+09 -3.3% 1.231e+09 will-it-scale.192.threads
>> 6630224 -3.3% 6409738 will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
>> 1.273e+09 -3.3% 1.231e+09 will-it-scale.workload
>
> We've double checked this, and it seems to be another case of
> the code alignment change caused regression change, just like
> the other case we debugged " [genirq] cbe16f35be:
> will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.2% regression"
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210428050758.GB52098(a)shbuild999.sh.intel.com/
>
> With the same debug patch of forcing function address 64 bytes
> aligned, then commit 4bad58ebc8 will bring no change on this case.
>
> commit 09c60546f04f "./Makefile: add debug option to enable function
> aligned on 32 bytes" only forced 32 bytes align, with thinking 64B
> align will occupy more code space, and affect iTLB more. Maybe we
> should just extend it to 64B align, as it is for debug only anyway.
thanks for the heads up!
But why is this restricted to debug mode?
The fact that adding a few bytes of text causes regressions in unrelated
code is not restricted to debug or am I missing something here?
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-30 8:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-20 3:08 [signal] 4bad58ebc8: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -3.3% regression kernel test robot
2021-04-20 3:08 ` kernel test robot
2021-04-20 18:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-20 18:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-22 6:02 ` Oliver Sang
2021-04-22 6:02 ` Oliver Sang
2021-04-22 15:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-22 15:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-04-30 8:13 ` Feng Tang
2021-04-30 8:13 ` Feng Tang
2021-04-30 8:57 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2021-04-30 8:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-01 9:46 ` Feng Tang
2021-05-01 9:46 ` Feng Tang
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=874kfof8un.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@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.