lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/4] sched:Consider imbalance_pct when comparing loads in numa_has_capacity
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> [2015-06-23 10:10:39]:
> > Please let me know if there are any better ways to observe the
> > spread. [...]
>
> There are. I see you are using prehistoric tooling, but see the various NUMA
> convergence latency measurement utilities in 'perf bench numa':
>
> vega:~> cat numa01-THREAD_ALLOC
>
> perf bench numa mem --no-data_rand_walk -p 2 -t 16 -G 0 -P 0 -T 192 -l 1000 -zZ0c $@
>
> You can generate very flexible setups of NUMA access patterns, and measure their
> behavior accurately.
>
> It's all so much more capable and more flexible than autonumabench ...

Okay, thanks for the hint, I will try this out in future.

>
> Also, when you are trying to report numbers for multiple runs, please use
> something like:
>
> perf stat --null --repeat 3 ...
>
> This will run the workload 3 times (doing only time measurement) and report the
> stddev in a human readable form.
>

Thanks again for this hint. Wouldnt system time/ user time also matter?
I guess once Mel did point out that it was important to make sure that
system time and user time dont increase when elapsed time decreases. But
I cant find the email though.

--
Thanks and Regards
Srikar Dronamraju



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-06-23 15:21    [W:9.419 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site