lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] Fix ebizzy performance regression due to X86 TLB range flush v2
From
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
>
> ebizzy
> 3.13.0-rc3 3.4.69 3.13.0-rc3 3.13.0-rc3
> thread vanilla vanilla altershift-v2r1 nowalk-v2r7
> Mean 1 7377.91 ( 0.00%) 6812.38 ( -7.67%) 7784.45 ( 5.51%) 7804.08 ( 5.78%)
> Mean 2 8262.07 ( 0.00%) 8276.75 ( 0.18%) 9437.49 ( 14.23%) 9450.88 ( 14.39%)
> Mean 3 7895.00 ( 0.00%) 8002.84 ( 1.37%) 8875.38 ( 12.42%) 8914.60 ( 12.91%)
> Mean 4 7658.74 ( 0.00%) 7824.83 ( 2.17%) 8509.10 ( 11.10%) 8399.43 ( 9.67%)
> Mean 5 7275.37 ( 0.00%) 7678.74 ( 5.54%) 8208.94 ( 12.83%) 8197.86 ( 12.68%)
> Mean 6 6875.50 ( 0.00%) 7597.18 ( 10.50%) 7755.66 ( 12.80%) 7807.51 ( 13.56%)
> Mean 7 6722.48 ( 0.00%) 7584.75 ( 12.83%) 7456.93 ( 10.93%) 7480.74 ( 11.28%)
> Mean 8 6559.55 ( 0.00%) 7591.51 ( 15.73%) 6879.01 ( 4.87%) 6881.86 ( 4.91%)

Hmm. Do you have any idea why 3.4.69 still seems to do better at
higher thread counts?

No complaints about this patch-series, just wondering..

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-13 23:01    [W:0.532 / U:0.860 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site