lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Bug #11308] tbench regression on each kernel release from 2.6.22 -> 2.6.28
Ingo Molnar a écrit :
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
>>> 4% on my machine, but apparently my machine is sooooo special (see
>>> oprofile thread), so maybe its cpus have a hard time playing with
>>> a contended cache line.
>>>
>>> It definitly needs more testing on other machines.
>>>
>>> Maybe you'll discover patch is bad on your machines, this is why
>>> it's in net-next-2.6
>> ok, i'll try it on my testbox too, to check whether it has any effect
>> - find below the port to -git.
>
> it gives a small speedup of ~1% on my box:
>
> before: Throughput 3437.65 MB/sec 64 procs
> after: Throughput 3473.99 MB/sec 64 procs

Strange, I get 2350 MB/sec on my 8 cpus box. "tbench 8"

>
> ... although that's still a bit close to the natural tbench noise
> range so it's not conclusive and not like a smoking gun IMO.
>
> But i think this change might just be papering over the real
> scalability problem that this workload has in my opinion: that there's
> a single localhost route/dst/device that millions of packets are
> squeezed through every second:

Yes, this point was mentioned on netdev a while back.

>
> phoenix:~> ifconfig lo
> lo Link encap:Local Loopback
> inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0
> UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1
> RX packets:258001524 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
> TX packets:258001524 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
> collisions:0 txqueuelen:0
> RX bytes:679809512144 (633.1 GiB) TX bytes:679809512144 (633.1 GiB)
>
> There does not seem to be any per CPU ness in localhost networking -
> it has a globally single-threaded rx/tx queue AFAICS even if both the
> client and server task is on the same CPU - how is that supposed to
> perform well? (but i might be missing something)

Stephen had a patch for this one too, but we got tbench noise too with this patch

http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2008/11/5/3926034


>
> What kind of test-system do you have - one with P4 style Xeon CPUs
> perhaps where dirty-cacheline cachemisses to DRAM were particularly
> expensive?

Its a HP BL460c g1

Dual quad-core cpus Intel E5450 @3.00GHz

So 8 logical cpus. My bench was "tbench 8"


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-11-17 18:37    [W:0.118 / U:1.740 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site