Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 Aug 2015 13:48:35 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/6] sched/fair: Compute capacity invariant load/utilization tracking |
| |
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:29:51PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:46:05PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 05:23:08PM +0100, Morten Rasmussen wrote: > > > Target: ARM TC2 A7-only (x3) > > > Test: hackbench -g 25 --threads -l 10000 > > > > > > Before After > > > 315.545 313.408 -0.68% > > > > > > Target: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 520 @ 2.40GHz > > > Test: hackbench -g 25 --threads -l 1000 (avg of 10) > > > > > > Before After > > > 6.4643 6.395 -1.07% > > > > Yeah, so that is a problem. > > Maybe I'm totally wrong, but doesn't hackbench report execution so less > is better? In that case -1.07% means we are doing better with the > patches applied (after time < before time). In any case, I should have > indicated whether the change is good or bad for performance. > > > I'm taking it some of the new scaling stuff doesn't compile away, can we > > look at fixing that? > > I will double-check that the stuff goes away as expected. I'm pretty > sure it does on ARM.
Ah, uhm.. you have a point there ;-) I'll run the numbers when I'm back home again.
| |