Messages in this thread | | | From | Dieter Nützel <> | Subject | Re: some more nifty benchmarks | Date | Fri, 5 Apr 2002 22:37:29 +0200 |
| |
On Freitag, 5. April 2002 :22, Ed Sweetman wrote: > On Thu, 2002-04-04 at 22:49, Dieter Nützel wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 2002-04-02 17:15:40, Ed Sweetman wrote:
[-]
> > Yep, FOUND it. > > Ingo`s latest sched-O1-2.4.18-pre8-K3 is the culprit!!! > > Even with -ac (2.4.19-pre2-ac2) and together with -aa (latest here is > > 2.4.18-pre8-K3-VM-24-preempt-lock). > > > > Below are the number for 2.4.18+sched-O1-2.4.18-pre8-K3. > > Have a look into the attachment, too. > > > > Hopefully you or Ingo will find something out. > > I seem to have lost your earlier emails. Did you get a max latency of > around <2 before this 0(1) scheduler patch?
In short:
YES with 2.4 and with preemption+lock-break I repeated it for 2.4.19-pre5+vm33. See results below.
It is NOT in any case an -aa VM or preemption+lock-break bug. Ingo's latest sched-O1-2.4.18-pre8-K3.patch for 2.4 is the culprit. So all latest -ac kernels are broken in this sense, too.
> 2.2 with low latency patch gets that. 2.4 with low latency patch is many > many times worse. The high latency areas of the kernel are already known.
I know :-) Bad we badly need a newer lock-break for 2.4 from Robert (sorry Andrew :-). I will do some "stats data collection" with my next boot.
> It's just a matter of deciding how to deal with them that's the problem. > It seems that it might be a general consensus that it can't be dealt with > in 2.4 mainstream.
No I think it is not. If we can eliminate the remaining bugs from O(1) and use preemption everything should be smooth.
> As you've implied before though, the scheduler is much more important > than latency is to the average user.
The O(1)-scheduler is great but broken (latency wise) in the current 2.4 version. Have anyone of you some older versions from Ingo around?
> As most people would know from > 2.2, audio would skip unless it was running -20 nice and the highest > priority etc. With 2.4's scheduler and preempt, well you dont have to > worry about skips and you can leave the player at a normal nice and > priority value.
That's not true with the O(1)-scheduler. In most of my tests (Ingo got my results) you have to renice the audio daemon to something like -16 (first "real time" class) and X to -10 (for good interactivity) during "heavy" background stuff (40 gcc and 40 g++ processes reniced +19 for example). This load resulting in ~350 processes, 80~85 running in parallel and sound playing on my "old" 1 GHz Athlon II with 640 MB...;-)
But that's not so good for the "normal" user. We need some "auto renicing".
BTW My former 2.4.17/2.4.18-pre numbers were much better for throughput and somewhat for latency.
I used Andrea's -aa VM and Robert's preemption and lock-break on ReiserFS all the time. But together with bootmem-2.4.17-pre6 and waitq-2.4.17-mainline-1. Anyone know where I can get newer versions of them?
Best dbench 32 numbers were: Throughput: ~55 MB/sec real ~1:15
Last one:
Were is Ingo? --- I hope he is fine!
Regards, Dieter
2.4.19-pre5-vm33
32 clients started ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................+..............+......................+........+...................................................................................................................+..+...........++.+....+++..+++++.+++++++..++++++++******************************** Throughput 40.4878 MB/sec (NB=50.6098 MB/sec 404.878 MBit/sec) 14.440u 50.650s 1:45.35 61.7% 0+0k 0+0io 939pf+0w
SunWave1 dbench/latencytest0.42-png# time ./do_tests none 3 256 0 350000000 x11perf - X11 performance program, version 1.5 The XFree86 Project, Inc server version 40200000 on :0.0 from SunWave1 Fri Apr 5 20:06:34 2002
Sync time adjustment is 0.2107 msecs.
3000 reps @ 2.2644 msec ( 442.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2663 msec ( 441.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2635 msec ( 442.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2654 msec ( 441.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2714 msec ( 440.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 15000 trep @ 2.2662 msec ( 441.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels
800 reps @ 11.6017 msec ( 86.2/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 800 reps @ 11.6358 msec ( 85.9/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 800 reps @ 11.6463 msec ( 85.9/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 800 reps @ 11.6122 msec ( 86.1/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 800 reps @ 11.6322 msec ( 86.0/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 4000 trep @ 11.6257 msec ( 86.0/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square
fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 4.2ms ( 0)| 1MS num_time_samples=63551 num_times_within_1ms=61215 factor=96.324212 2MS num_time_samples=63551 num_times_within_2ms=63546 factor=99.992132 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 3.8ms ( 0)| 1MS num_time_samples=20758 num_times_within_1ms=19668 factor=94.749012 2MS num_time_samples=20758 num_times_within_2ms=20693 factor=99.686868 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 30.0ms ( 3)| 1MS num_time_samples=17604 num_times_within_1ms=16825 factor=95.574869 2MS num_time_samples=17604 num_times_within_2ms=17591 factor=99.926153 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 20:09 tmpfile fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 14.8ms ( 12)| 1MS num_time_samples=24448 num_times_within_1ms=23863 factor=97.607166 2MS num_time_samples=24448 num_times_within_2ms=24425 factor=99.905923 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 20:09 tmpfile -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 20:10 tmpfile2 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 4.5ms ( 1)| 1MS num_time_samples=16142 num_times_within_1ms=15463 factor=95.793582 2MS num_time_samples=16142 num_times_within_2ms=16134 factor=99.950440 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 20:09 tmpfile -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 20:10 tmpfile2 122.970u 18.150s 4:09.80 56.4% 0+0k 0+0io 10418pf+0w
*******************************************************************************
2.4.19-pre5-vm33-rml
32 clients started ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................++.....+.........+.........+....+.++.....+.+.+...+.+.....++.+...+++++...++.+.++++++++******************************** Throughput 39.637 MB/sec (NB=49.5463 MB/sec 396.37 MBit/sec) 14.370u 53.580s 1:47.59 63.1% 0+0k 0+0io 939pf+0w
SunWave1 dbench/latencytest0.42-png# time ./do_tests none 3 256 0 350000000 x11perf - X11 performance program, version 1.5 The XFree86 Project, Inc server version 40200000 on :0.0 from SunWave1 Fri Apr 5 21:29:15 2002
Sync time adjustment is 0.2172 msecs.
3000 reps @ 2.2866 msec ( 437.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2899 msec ( 437.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2885 msec ( 437.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2847 msec ( 438.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 3000 reps @ 2.2958 msec ( 436.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels 15000 trep @ 2.2891 msec ( 437.0/sec): Scroll 500x500 pixels
400 reps @ 11.7923 msec ( 84.8/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 400 reps @ 11.8264 msec ( 84.6/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 400 reps @ 11.8240 msec ( 84.6/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 400 reps @ 11.8370 msec ( 84.5/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 400 reps @ 11.8484 msec ( 84.4/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square 2000 trep @ 11.8256 msec ( 84.6/sec): ShmPutImage 500x500 square
fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 4.2ms ( 0)| 1MS num_time_samples=48986 num_times_within_1ms=47284 factor=96.525538 2MS num_time_samples=48986 num_times_within_2ms=48979 factor=99.985710 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 3.8ms ( 0)| 1MS num_time_samples=20764 num_times_within_1ms=20537 factor=98.906762 2MS num_time_samples=20764 num_times_within_2ms=20762 factor=99.990368 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 3.8ms ( 0)| 1MS num_time_samples=20603 num_times_within_1ms=20109 factor=97.602291 2MS num_time_samples=20603 num_times_within_2ms=20602 factor=99.995146 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 21:31 tmpfile fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 6.8ms ( 2)| 1MS num_time_samples=25283 num_times_within_1ms=24655 factor=97.516118 2MS num_time_samples=25283 num_times_within_2ms=25280 factor=99.988134 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 21:31 tmpfile -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 21:32 tmpfile2 fragment latency = 1.451247 ms cpu latency = 1.160998 ms 5.3ms ( 1)| 1MS num_time_samples=16210 num_times_within_1ms=15669 factor=96.662554 2MS num_time_samples=16210 num_times_within_2ms=16203 factor=99.956817 PIXEL_PER_MS=103 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 21:31 tmpfile -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 350000000 Apr 5 21:32 tmpfile2 116.600u 19.040s 3:54.15 57.9% 0+0k 0+0io 10418pf+0w
[unhandled content-type:application/x-tgz][unhandled content-type:application/x-tgz] | |