lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jul]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/18] Basic scheduler support for automatic NUMA balancing V5


Summary:
Seeing improvement on a 2 node when running autonumabenchmark .
But seeing regression for specjbb for the same box.

Also seeing huge regression when running autonumabenchmark
both on 4 node and 8 node box.


Below is the autonuma benchmark results on a 2 node machine.
Autonuma benchmark results.
mainline v3.9: (Ht enabled)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
numa01: 220.12 246.96 239.18 9.69
numa02: 41.85 43.02 42.43 0.47
v3.9 + Mel's v5 patches:A (Ht enabled)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
numa01: 239.52 242.99 241.61 1.26 -1.00%
numa02: 37.94 38.12 38.05 0.06 11.49%

mainline v3.9:
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
numa01: 118.72 121.04 120.23 0.83
numa02: 36.64 37.56 36.99 0.34
v3.9 + Mel's v5 patches:
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
numa01: 111.34 122.28 118.61 3.77 1.32%
numa02: 36.23 37.27 36.55 0.37 1.18%

Here are results of specjbb run on a 2 node machine.
Specjbb was run on 3 vms.
In the fit case, one vm was big to fit one node size.
In the no-fit case, one vm was bigger than the node size.


Specjbb results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | vm| nofit| fit|
| | vm| noksm| ksm| noksm| ksm|
| | vm| nothp| thp| nothp| thp| nothp| thp| nothp| thp|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| mainline_v39+ | vm_1| 136056| 189423| 135359| 186722| 136983| 191669| 136728| 184253|
| mainline_v39+ | vm_2| 66041| 84779| 64564| 86645| 67426| 84427| 63657| 85043|
| mainline_v39+ | vm_3| 67322| 83301| 63731| 85394| 65015| 85156| 63838| 84199|
| mel_numa_balan| vm_1| 133170| 177883| 136385| 176716| 140650| 174535| 132811| 190120|
| mel_numa_balan| vm_2| 65021| 81707| 62876| 81826| 63635| 84943| 58313| 78997|
| mel_numa_balan| vm_3| 61915| 82198| 60106| 81723| 64222| 81123| 59559| 78299|
| change % | vm_1| -2.12| -6.09| 0.76| -5.36| 2.68| -8.94| -2.86| 3.18|
| change % | vm_2| -1.54| -3.62| -2.61| -5.56| -5.62| 0.61| -8.39| -7.11|
| change % | vm_3| -8.03| -1.32| -5.69| -4.30| -1.22| -4.74| -6.70| -7.01|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

numactl o/p

available: 2 nodes (0-1)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 12 13 14 15 16 17
node 0 size: 12276 MB
node 0 free: 10574 MB
node 1 cpus: 6 7 8 9 10 11 18 19 20 21 22 23
node 1 size: 12288 MB
node 1 free: 9697 MB
node distances:
node 0 1
0: 10 21
1: 21 10


Autonuma results on a 4 node machine.

KernelVersion: 3.9.0(HT)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
numa01: 569.80 624.94 593.12 19.14
numa02: 18.65 21.32 19.69 0.98

KernelVersion: 3.9.0 + Mel's v5 patches(HT)
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
numa01: 718.83 750.46 740.10 11.42 -19.59%
numa02: 20.07 22.36 20.97 0.81 -5.72%

KernelVersion: 3.9.0()
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev
numa01: 586.75 628.65 604.15 16.13
numa02: 19.67 20.49 19.93 0.29

KernelVersion: 3.9.0 + Mel's v5 patches
Testcase: Min Max Avg StdDev %Change
numa01: 741.48 759.37 747.23 6.36 -18.84%
numa02: 20.55 22.06 21.21 0.52 -5.80%



System x3750 M4 -[8722C1A]-

numactl o/p
available: 4 nodes (0-3)
node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
node 0 size: 65468 MB
node 0 free: 63069 MB
node 1 cpus: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
node 1 size: 65536 MB
node 1 free: 63497 MB
node 2 cpus: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
node 2 size: 65536 MB
node 2 free: 63515 MB
node 3 cpus: 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63
node 3 size: 65536 MB
node 3 free: 63659 MB
node distances:
node 0 1 2 3
0: 10 11 11 12
1: 11 10 12 11
2: 11 12 10 11
3: 12 11 11 10

The results on the 8 node also look similar to 4 node.
--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-07-16 17:43    [W:0.467 / U:3.820 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site