Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 10:37 +0100, Cyrus Massoumi wrote: > Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 11:02 +0100, Cyrus Massoumi wrote: > >> Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > >>> On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > >

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 11:02 +0100, Cyrus Massoumi wrote: Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PRO

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 11:02 +0100, Cyrus Massoumi wrote: > Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > >> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > >>> On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECT

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

* Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We don't have min_granularity anymore. > > > > i think we should reintroduce it in the SCHED_DEBUG case and make it > > the main tunable item - sched_nr is a nice performance optimization > > but quite unintuitive as a tuning knob. > > ok, I d

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

(restoring CCs which I inadvertly dropped) On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 16:00 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > could we instead justmake sched_nr_latency non-tunable, and > > > recalculate it from the sysctl handler whenever sched_latency or > > > sched_m

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: sub-bisecting captured patch 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36bdb0be7f

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > sub-bisecting captured patch > > > > 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

* Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > static int one_hundred = 100; > +static int int_max = INT_MAX; > > /* this is needed for the proc_dointvec_minmax for [fs_]overflow UID and GID > */ > static int maxolduid = 65535; > @@ -239,7 +240,10 @@ static struct ctl_table kern_table[] = {

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Wed, 2007-10-31 at 17:57 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > sub-bisecting captured patch > > > > 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 16:36 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > sub-bisecting captured patch > > > 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36bdb0be7fe4c8938(sched: uniform tunings) > > > caused 20% regression

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Tue, 2007-10-30 at 08:26 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > sub-bisecting captured patch > > 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36bdb0be7fe4c8938(sched: uniform tunings) > > caused 20% regression of aim7. > > > > The last 10% should be also related to sched para

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

* Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sub-bisecting captured patch > 38ad464d410dadceda1563f36bdb0be7fe4c8938(sched: uniform tunings) > caused 20% regression of aim7. > > The last 10% should be also related to sched parameters, such like > sysctl_sched_min_granularity. ah, interesting

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 17:37 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 10:22 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 10:22 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > > > > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30% regression. I did a bisect > > and found patch > > http://git.ke

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 11:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 17:43 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30% regression. I did a bisect and > > found > > patch

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

* Zhang, Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30% regression. I did a bisect > and found patch > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=

Re: aim7 -30% regression in 2.6.24-rc1

On Fri, 2007-10-26 at 17:43 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > I tested 2.6.24-rc1 on my x86_64 machine which has 2 quad-core processors. > > Comparing with 2.6.23, aim7 has about -30% regression. I did a bisect and > found > patch > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=