Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sched: smart wake-affine | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Date | Fri, 05 Jul 2013 06:08:38 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 10:47 +0800, Michael Wang wrote: > On 07/04/2013 06:33 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > [snip] > >> Well, seems like we still have many follow-up research works after fix > >> the issue ;-) > > > > Yeah. Like how to how to exterminate the plus sign, they munch cache > > lines, and have a general tendency to negatively impact benchmarks. > > > > Q6600 box, hackbench -l 1000 > > avg > > 3.10.0-regress 2.293 2.297 2.313 2.291 2.295 2.297 1.000 > > 3.10.0-regressx 2.560 2.524 2.427 2.599 2.602 2.542 1.106 > > Wow, I used to think such issue is very hard to be tracked by > benchmarks, is this regression stable?
Yeah, seems to be. I was curious as to why you saw an improvement to hackbench, didn't seem there should be any, so though I'd try it on my little box on the way to a long weekend. The unexpected happened.
> > pahole said... > > > > marge:/usr/local/src/kernel/linux-3.x.git # tail virgin > > long unsigned int timer_slack_ns; /* 1512 8 */ > > long unsigned int default_timer_slack_ns; /* 1520 8 */ > > atomic_t ptrace_bp_refcnt; /* 1528 4 */ > > > > /* size: 1536, cachelines: 24, members: 125 */ > > /* sum members: 1509, holes: 6, sum holes: 23 */ > > /* bit holes: 1, sum bit holes: 26 bits */ > > /* padding: 4 */ > > /* paddings: 1, sum paddings: 4 */ > > }; > > > > marge:/usr/local/src/kernel/linux-3.x.git # tail michael > > long unsigned int default_timer_slack_ns; /* 1552 8 */ > > atomic_t ptrace_bp_refcnt; /* 1560 4 */ > > > > /* size: 1568, cachelines: 25, members: 128 */ > > /* sum members: 1533, holes: 8, sum holes: 31 */ > > /* bit holes: 1, sum bit holes: 26 bits */ > > /* padding: 4 */ > > /* paddings: 1, sum paddings: 4 */ > > /* last cacheline: 32 bytes */ > > }; > > > > ..but plugging holes, didn't help, moving this/that around neither, nor > > did letting pahole go wild to get the line back. It's plus signs I tell > > ya, the evil things must die ;-) > > Hmm...so the new members kicked some tail members to a new line...or may > be totally different when compiler take part in... > > It's really hard to estimate the influence, especially when the > task_struct is still keep changing...
Yeah, could be memory layout crud that disappears with the next pull/build. Wouldn't be the first time.
-Mike
| |