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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS 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 6CE9BC43219 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 15:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E042087F for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 15:54:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="QlxvsJh7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726654AbfD0Pyj (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Apr 2019 11:54:39 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-f173.google.com ([209.85.208.173]:36894 "EHLO mail-lj1-f173.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725942AbfD0Pyj (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Apr 2019 11:54:39 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-f173.google.com with SMTP id b12so4412274lji.4 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 08:54:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=v9jRGvR38YeS8duXc5CkzDu4r22TqaqtlDoyKR/OJfM=; b=QlxvsJh79oTuZ15fsP4HEluar8SoZbUYXIbDYYZMncKuxeVn5fBVVlByVmjT5QeUnb srXbGbCg+kefTQGJ+S17q+XYWnMAqwcRmqOb466LrXzuD6cAgAug4kTd6ouLLdMw4Yf+ fcT0SVKIYmcPOa6Ts5jdiwChxooXXzeTCXL4Z3g/Gci7MXFhmMohG+p39BV0FrlV7VxQ oenLyqNlDqCu2X0kZ4yVBKE0a3M7+4mu8x82ynp351xjEfW/ugX5paR5y/ciCYCFPJF6 4Tkv6MLgb0xLrHBDxcMTZ56MH8+0RvIexcg6EbCY0olifa1OawZbut5mduu5mkpXFO1j hWJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=v9jRGvR38YeS8duXc5CkzDu4r22TqaqtlDoyKR/OJfM=; b=Yb7bK5eKS3XipkSi9DC6IrVzEmFbY7miYO3LsjnrxcdmT1iltgf5S+lbmzrQfFEvsP +BzUMT+faxuxzfoBXxR+puEbLHLl9Bd7lRTwYgE2PJvuT9vv7hrOBp/8e2yFJeo//l3M 9muhkGNKXjjcWnKHpHsLwREUuu1bHz5e7ZD3VkLtl01M+2gZ0fIueaqtPhP6ee5cYzFw BcuLTWtHAGoDpPwA+cfB6VzpSYXDHIlSfd+D4oCOm57K8C8BSwFb0MPlMKR91TjqBjdG Dxy6VnFSprEjwVT4MPnNmbJZSyyVWu7NQ78caRxDA0tEujU0s7SoBJ88aDWFHhtXwfVp mD4w== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUDrUuMRbCsZ6lm85p+X+ksD2PRkhuKTVGOmXVuI0k2HwSoU9bc Vcob1b90papz6PzdQaKPqfJ4elu4ZSfeid/4Oyw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyppcVschcq3ERdOB0briUIt1itxWbcXgE1bwck2mLD3KA7+D3PK1qrWXz/jV+gNSdLBgPl8srpPsnbL3fp6TE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:810d:: with SMTP id d13mr27963815ljg.93.1556380476495; Sat, 27 Apr 2019 08:54:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190424140013.GA14594@sinkpad> <20190425095508.GA8387@gmail.com> <20190427091716.GC99668@gmail.com> <20190427142137.GA72051@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20190427142137.GA72051@gmail.com> From: Aubrey Li Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2019 23:54:24 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/17] Core scheduling v2 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Julien Desfossez , Vineeth Remanan Pillai , Nishanth Aravamudan , Peter Zijlstra , Tim Chen , Thomas Gleixner , Paul Turner , Linus Torvalds , Linux List Kernel Mailing , Subhra Mazumdar , =?UTF-8?B?RnLDqWTDqXJpYyBXZWlzYmVja2Vy?= , Kees Cook , Greg Kerr , Phil Auld , Aaron Lu , Valentin Schneider , Mel Gorman , Pawan Gupta , Paolo Bonzini Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 10:21 PM Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Aubrey Li wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2019 at 5:17 PM Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > > * Aubrey Li wrote: > > > > > > > I have the same environment setup above, for nosmt cases, I used > > > > /sys interface Thomas mentioned, below is the result: > > > > > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 1/1 1.987( 1.97%) 2.043( 1.76%) -2.84% 1.985( 1.70%) 0.12% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 2/2 2.074( 1.16%) 2.057( 2.09%) 0.81% 2.072( 0.77%) 0.10% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 4/4 2.140( 0.00%) 2.138( 0.49%) 0.09% 2.137( 0.89%) 0.12% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 8/8 2.140( 0.00%) 2.144( 0.53%) -0.17% 2.140( 0.00%) 0.00% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 16/16 2.361( 2.99%) 2.369( 2.65%) -0.30% 2.406( 2.53%) -1.87% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 32/32 5.032( 8.68%) 3.485( 0.49%) 30.76% 6.002(27.21%) -19.27% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 64/64 7.577(34.35%) 3.972(23.18%) 47.57% 18.235(14.14%) -140.68% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 128/128 24.639(14.28%) 27.440( 8.24%) -11.37% 34.746( 6.92%) -41.02% > > > > NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- > > > > 256/256 38.797( 8.59%) 44.067(16.20%) -13.58% 42.536( 7.57%) -9.64% > > > > > > What do these numbers mean? Are these latencies, i.e. lower is better? > > > > Yeah, like above setup, I run sysbench(Non-AVX task, NA) and gemmbench > > (AVX512 task, AVX) in different level utilizatoin. The machine has 104 CPUs, so > > nosmt has 52 CPUs. These numbers are 95th percentile latency of sysbench, > > lower is better. > > But what we are really interested in are throughput numbers under these > three kernel variants, right? > These are sysbench events per second number, higher is better. NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 1/1 508.5( 0.2%) 504.7( 1.1%) -0.8% 509.0( 0.2%) 0.1% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 2/2 1000.2( 1.4%) 1004.1( 1.6%) 0.4% 997.6( 1.2%) -0.3% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 4/4 1912.1( 1.0%) 1904.2( 1.1%) -0.4% 1914.9( 1.3%) 0.1% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 8/8 3753.5( 0.3%) 3748.2( 0.3%) -0.1% 3751.3( 0.4%) -0.1% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 16/16 7139.3( 2.4%) 7137.9( 1.8%) -0.0% 7049.2( 2.4%) -1.3% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 32/32 10899.0( 4.2%) 10780.3( 4.4%) -1.1% 10339.2( 9.6%) -5.1% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 64/64 15086.1(11.5%) 14262.0( 8.2%) -5.5% 11168.7(22.2%) -26.0% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 128/128 15371.9(22.0%) 14675.8(14.4%) -4.5% 10963.9(18.5%) -28.7% NA/AVX baseline(std%) coresched(std%) +/- nosmt(std%) +/- 256/256 15990.8(22.0%) 12227.9(10.3%) -23.5% 10469.9(19.6%) -34.5%