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=-2.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 EA370C31E5B for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 18:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C23D4214AF for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 18:33:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=digitalocean.com header.i=@digitalocean.com header.b="UTNQ4lDM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730242AbfFSSdN (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2019 14:33:13 -0400 Received: from mail-qt1-f194.google.com ([209.85.160.194]:37167 "EHLO mail-qt1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726109AbfFSSdN (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2019 14:33:13 -0400 Received: by mail-qt1-f194.google.com with SMTP id y57so209534qtk.4 for ; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:33:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=digitalocean.com; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=qmdp2hLc7f7LXlGpZWzREus9GL3q2Z2GGo4gIgm/xrg=; b=UTNQ4lDMM4HOUZwz/VfVoBWVf9YyGjTc27oNXdkMUoFx+YvLAYq/PahbGAidF4op0x 6ADkzk5HjWEqAlcrNdPOCZFkMjM2Gegh3w6x3/7qSMw+z+lY20Gn93gLzGc68/TIxYpH 8KVLZH1Lg0cImTyKxEP04zb5/hheamoBeD7jI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=qmdp2hLc7f7LXlGpZWzREus9GL3q2Z2GGo4gIgm/xrg=; b=WlNgYfpiOICc9MYn0DqqTYJ06r1tQYF8rpW31sI1pETEqjYr4yt9jEVI98c4WDo3BJ NsAoxV/rTdgfyfNQmwXWPwthsX5pP724KS82zN0oYxGPJgb9XmSMaRKZXW/YT37YiW/m QNCk3zhYmKnJh9xtKnoESSUxMFpAZ9t/WY+CedOxvbTeUFrUADs4J4o7FloTWG6SIC8z drVtolxkDHbKSH8o/7+0QsR5xd/s1PygJ8XOr3yvC7kAT3Q3nYffmVc4jskIMwi6+B5q 1ECmvOaBBHcK1eJpBnoTz+YxkJg4y+7g3NwaMvfZY8TLT9gvwi6Kc9fAL/t0//+2/KUr GBvg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV3F5fL33+/x/cWn0xTIGs2giHTuEndy9xBCgdlonTUMudn3bJ+ dWKprawpeIUjFbTYD1Rial4Z4w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxPjcl2hWZP3R+bxalVB3SIb1aKDnmCr+tkSn8M7rbe2IFhnZU1zIJliIIbYegdX1zWks4CSQ== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:25ac:: with SMTP id e41mr21132667qte.101.1560969192340; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:33:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sinkpad (mtlxpqak-1176247880.sdsl.bell.ca. [70.28.30.72]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d123sm11973097qkb.94.2019.06.19.11.33.10 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 19 Jun 2019 11:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 14:33:02 -0400 From: Julien Desfossez To: Aubrey Li Cc: Subhra Mazumdar , Aaron Lu , Vineeth Remanan Pillai , Nishanth Aravamudan , Peter Zijlstra , Tim Chen , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , Linus Torvalds , Linux List Kernel Mailing , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker , Kees Cook , Greg Kerr , Phil Auld , Valentin Schneider , Mel Gorman , Pawan Gupta , Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 00/16] Core scheduling v3 Message-ID: <20190619183302.GA6775@sinkpad> References: <20190531210816.GA24027@sinkpad> <20190606152637.GA5703@sinkpad> <20190612163345.GB26997@sinkpad> <635c01b0-d8f3-561b-5396-10c75ed03712@oracle.com> <20190613032246.GA17752@sinkpad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Mutt 1.5.24 (2015-08-30) User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 17-Jun-2019 10:51:27 AM, Aubrey Li wrote: > The result looks still unfair, and particularly, the variance is too high, I just want to confirm that I am also seeing the same issue with a similar setup. I also tried with the priority boost fix we previously posted, the results are slightly better, but we are still seeing a very high variance. On average, the results I get for 10 30-seconds runs are still much better than nosmt (both sysbench pinned on the same sibling) for the memory benchmark, and pretty similar for the CPU benchmark, but the high variance between runs is indeed concerning. Still digging :-) Thanks, Julien