On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 03:34:28PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 12:41:34PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > Hi Mel,
> >
> > We noticed a minor dbench throughput regression on commit
> > f7b5d647946aae1647bf5cd26c16b3a793c1ac49 ("mm: page_alloc: abort fair
> > zone allocation policy when remotes nodes are encountered").
> >
> > testcase: ivb44/dbench/100%
> >
> > bb0b6dffa2ccfbd f7b5d647946aae1647bf5cd26
> > --------------- -------------------------
> > 25692 ± 0% -3.0% 24913 ± 0% dbench.throughput-MB/sec
> > 6974259 ± 6% -12.1% 6127616 ± 0% meminfo.DirectMap2M
> > 18.43 ± 0% -4.6% 17.59 ± 0% turbostat.RAM_W
> > 9302 ± 0% -3.6% 8965 ± 1% time.user_time
> > 1425791 ± 1% -2.0% 1396598 ± 0%
> > time.involuntary_context_switches
> >
> > Disclaimer:
> > Results have been estimated based on internal Intel analysis and are
> > provided
> > for informational purposes only. Any difference in system hardware or
> > software
> > design or configuration may affect actual performance.
> >
>
> DirectMap2M changing is a major surprise and doesn't make sense for this
> machine.
The ivb44's hardware configuration is
model: Ivytown Ivy Bridge-EP
nr_cpu: 48
memory: 64G
And note that this is an in-memory dbench run, which is why
dbench.throughput-MB/sec is so high.
> Did the amount of memory in the machine change between two tests?
Nope. They are back-to-back test runs, so the environment pretty much
remains the same.
Thanks,
Fengguang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
