Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1345570 > unrolled thread
| Started by | kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-29 09:40 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-03-01 09:40 +0100 |
| Articles | 4 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> - 2016-02-29 09:40 +0100
Re: [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-02-29 10:40 +0100
Re: [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-02-29 18:40 +0100
Re: [LKP] [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> - 2016-03-01 09:40 +0100
| From | kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 09:40 +0100 |
| Subject | [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops |
| Message-ID | <r7rx1-Av-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
FYI, we noticed the below changes on
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
commit 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90 ("futex: Remove requirement for lock_page() in get_futex_key()")
=========================================================================================
compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase:
gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lkp-sbx04/futex1/will-it-scale
commit:
8ad7b378d0d016309014cae0f640434bca7b5e11
65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90
8ad7b378d0d01630 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a
---------------- --------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev
\ | \
5076304 ± 0% +25.6% 6374220 ± 0% will-it-scale.per_process_ops
1194117 ± 0% +14.4% 1366153 ± 1% will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
0.58 ± 0% -2.0% 0.57 ± 0% will-it-scale.scalability
6820 ± 0% -19.6% 5483 ± 15% meminfo.AnonHugePages
2652 ± 5% -10.4% 2375 ± 2% vmstat.system.cs
2848 ± 32% +141.2% 6870 ± 65% numa-meminfo.node1.Active(anon)
2832 ± 31% +57.6% 4465 ± 27% numa-meminfo.node1.AnonPages
15018 ± 12% -23.3% 11515 ± 15% numa-meminfo.node2.AnonPages
1214 ± 14% -22.8% 936.75 ± 20% numa-meminfo.node3.PageTables
712.25 ± 32% +141.2% 1718 ± 65% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_active_anon
708.25 ± 31% +57.7% 1116 ± 27% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_anon_pages
3754 ± 12% -23.3% 2879 ± 15% numa-vmstat.node2.nr_anon_pages
304.75 ± 14% -23.1% 234.50 ± 20% numa-vmstat.node3.nr_page_table_pages
3.53 ± 1% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.___might_sleep.__might_sleep.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
4.34 ± 1% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.__might_sleep.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
1.27 ± 3% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.__wake_up_bit.unlock_page.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
4.36 ± 1% +29.6% 5.65 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.drop_futex_key_refs.isra.12.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
6.69 ± 1% +28.1% 8.57 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.entry_SYSCALL_64
6.73 ± 0% +30.6% 8.79 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_swapgs
74.21 ± 0% -11.0% 66.06 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
59.05 ± 0% -21.4% 46.40 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
4.12 ± 0% +78.5% 7.36 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.get_futex_key_refs.isra.11.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
2.27 ± 3% +24.1% 2.82 ± 4% perf-profile.cycles.get_user_pages_fast.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
26.95 ± 0% +30.0% 35.04 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
13.43 ± 0% +27.2% 17.09 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.gup_pte_range.gup_pud_range.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake
19.66 ± 1% +28.4% 25.24 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.gup_pud_range.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
4.33 ± 1% +37.0% 5.93 ± 4% perf-profile.cycles.hash_futex.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
13.59 ± 0% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.unlock_page.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
15160 ± 19% -34.8% 9883 ± 0% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.exec_clock.min
27.25 ± 15% -37.6% 17.00 ± 8% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load_avg.7
21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[2].1
21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[3].1
21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[4].1
1790 ± 0% +42.4% 2549 ± 45% sched_debug.cpu.curr->pid.21
50033 ± 4% -6.8% 46622 ± 4% sched_debug.cpu.nr_load_updates.29
4398 ± 42% +103.5% 8949 ± 23% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.11
7452 ± 34% +111.3% 15744 ± 54% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.20
3739 ± 13% +213.5% 11723 ± 40% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.23
1648 ± 53% +96.5% 3239 ± 63% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.51
0.25 ±519% -1300.0% -3.00 ±-52% sched_debug.cpu.nr_uninterruptible.24
8632 ± 16% -32.5% 5823 ± 19% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.1
5091 ± 36% +137.5% 12092 ± 31% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.11
12453 ± 90% -74.6% 3159 ± 24% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.2
7782 ± 32% +118.2% 16977 ± 46% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.20
2665 ± 48% -49.8% 1337 ± 30% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.32
1365 ± 11% -14.0% 1174 ± 3% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.45
1693 ± 51% +147.7% 4193 ± 42% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.51
5023 ± 57% -51.5% 2434 ± 43% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.57
1705 ± 16% +129.6% 3915 ± 48% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.23
536.25 ± 14% -18.7% 435.75 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.45
1228 ± 19% -27.3% 892.50 ± 17% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.5
1919 ± 55% +88.5% 3617 ± 37% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.11
7699 ± 35% -43.7% 4335 ± 43% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.24
5380 ± 36% -45.6% 2926 ± 18% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.30
563.25 ± 20% +140.3% 1353 ± 38% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.11
4297 ± 46% -49.1% 2186 ± 39% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.24
2828 ± 47% -47.8% 1475 ± 34% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.27
3243 ± 36% -54.3% 1482 ± 32% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.30
199.25 ± 6% +100.6% 399.75 ± 32% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.44
1158 ± 64% -67.3% 379.00 ± 46% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.54
242.25 ± 21% +51.0% 365.75 ± 19% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.55
1009 ± 26% -50.8% 496.50 ± 44% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.59
1736 ± 53% -67.8% 559.25 ± 22% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.9
lkp-sbx04: Sandy Bridge-EX
Memory: 64G
perf-profile.cycles.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
76 ++---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
74 ++ .*.. .*..*..*.. .*.. .*.. .*.. .*.. .*..*..*..* |
*..*. *..*..*. *..*. *.*. *. *. *. |
| |
72 ++ |
| |
70 ++ |
| |
68 ++ |
| |
| O O O O O O O O O O O |
66 O+ O O O O O
| O O O O O O O |
64 ++-------------O-------------------------------------------------------+
will-it-scale.per_process_ops
6.6e+06 O+----O-O--O------------------------------------------------------+
| O O O O O |
6.4e+06 ++ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
| |
6.2e+06 ++ |
6e+06 ++ |
| |
5.8e+06 ++ |
| |
5.6e+06 ++ |
5.4e+06 ++ |
| |
5.2e+06 ++ |
*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.* |
5e+06 ++----------------------------------------------------------------+
[*] bisect-good sample
[O] bisect-bad sample
To reproduce:
git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git
cd lkp-tests
bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
bin/lkp run job.yaml
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.
Thanks,
Ying Huang
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 10:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r7st5-1cj-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1345570 |
* kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> commit 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90 ("futex: Remove requirement for
> lock_page() in get_futex_key()")
I have asked for this before, but let me try again: could you _PLEASE_ make these
emails more readable?
For example what are the 'below changes'? Changes in the profile output? Profiles
always change from run to run, so that alone is not informative.
Also, there are a lot of changes - which ones prompted the email to be generated?
All in one, this email is hard to parse, because it just dumps a lot of
information with very little explanatory structure for someone not versed in their
format. Please try to create an easy to parse 'story' that leads the reader
towards what you want these emails to tell - not just a raw dump of seemingly
unconnected pieces of data ...
Thanks,
Ingo
>
>
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase:
> gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lkp-sbx04/futex1/will-it-scale
>
> commit:
> 8ad7b378d0d016309014cae0f640434bca7b5e11
> 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90
>
> 8ad7b378d0d01630 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a
> ---------------- --------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 5076304 ± 0% +25.6% 6374220 ± 0% will-it-scale.per_process_ops
> 1194117 ± 0% +14.4% 1366153 ± 1% will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
> 0.58 ± 0% -2.0% 0.57 ± 0% will-it-scale.scalability
> 6820 ± 0% -19.6% 5483 ± 15% meminfo.AnonHugePages
> 2652 ± 5% -10.4% 2375 ± 2% vmstat.system.cs
> 2848 ± 32% +141.2% 6870 ± 65% numa-meminfo.node1.Active(anon)
> 2832 ± 31% +57.6% 4465 ± 27% numa-meminfo.node1.AnonPages
> 15018 ± 12% -23.3% 11515 ± 15% numa-meminfo.node2.AnonPages
> 1214 ± 14% -22.8% 936.75 ± 20% numa-meminfo.node3.PageTables
> 712.25 ± 32% +141.2% 1718 ± 65% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_active_anon
> 708.25 ± 31% +57.7% 1116 ± 27% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_anon_pages
> 3754 ± 12% -23.3% 2879 ± 15% numa-vmstat.node2.nr_anon_pages
> 304.75 ± 14% -23.1% 234.50 ± 20% numa-vmstat.node3.nr_page_table_pages
> 3.53 ± 1% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.___might_sleep.__might_sleep.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
> 4.34 ± 1% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.__might_sleep.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
> 1.27 ± 3% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.__wake_up_bit.unlock_page.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
> 4.36 ± 1% +29.6% 5.65 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.drop_futex_key_refs.isra.12.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 6.69 ± 1% +28.1% 8.57 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.entry_SYSCALL_64
> 6.73 ± 0% +30.6% 8.79 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_swapgs
> 74.21 ± 0% -11.0% 66.06 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 59.05 ± 0% -21.4% 46.40 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 4.12 ± 0% +78.5% 7.36 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.get_futex_key_refs.isra.11.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 2.27 ± 3% +24.1% 2.82 ± 4% perf-profile.cycles.get_user_pages_fast.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 26.95 ± 0% +30.0% 35.04 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
> 13.43 ± 0% +27.2% 17.09 ± 1% perf-profile.cycles.gup_pte_range.gup_pud_range.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake
> 19.66 ± 1% +28.4% 25.24 ± 0% perf-profile.cycles.gup_pud_range.get_user_pages_fast.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex
> 4.33 ± 1% +37.0% 5.93 ± 4% perf-profile.cycles.hash_futex.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 13.59 ± 0% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1% perf-profile.cycles.unlock_page.get_futex_key.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex
> 15160 ± 19% -34.8% 9883 ± 0% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.exec_clock.min
> 27.25 ± 15% -37.6% 17.00 ± 8% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load_avg.7
> 21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[2].1
> 21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[3].1
> 21.00 ± 38% -27.4% 15.25 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.cpu_load[4].1
> 1790 ± 0% +42.4% 2549 ± 45% sched_debug.cpu.curr->pid.21
> 50033 ± 4% -6.8% 46622 ± 4% sched_debug.cpu.nr_load_updates.29
> 4398 ± 42% +103.5% 8949 ± 23% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.11
> 7452 ± 34% +111.3% 15744 ± 54% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.20
> 3739 ± 13% +213.5% 11723 ± 40% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.23
> 1648 ± 53% +96.5% 3239 ± 63% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.51
> 0.25 ±519% -1300.0% -3.00 ±-52% sched_debug.cpu.nr_uninterruptible.24
> 8632 ± 16% -32.5% 5823 ± 19% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.1
> 5091 ± 36% +137.5% 12092 ± 31% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.11
> 12453 ± 90% -74.6% 3159 ± 24% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.2
> 7782 ± 32% +118.2% 16977 ± 46% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.20
> 2665 ± 48% -49.8% 1337 ± 30% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.32
> 1365 ± 11% -14.0% 1174 ± 3% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.45
> 1693 ± 51% +147.7% 4193 ± 42% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.51
> 5023 ± 57% -51.5% 2434 ± 43% sched_debug.cpu.sched_count.57
> 1705 ± 16% +129.6% 3915 ± 48% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.23
> 536.25 ± 14% -18.7% 435.75 ± 2% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.45
> 1228 ± 19% -27.3% 892.50 ± 17% sched_debug.cpu.sched_goidle.5
> 1919 ± 55% +88.5% 3617 ± 37% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.11
> 7699 ± 35% -43.7% 4335 ± 43% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.24
> 5380 ± 36% -45.6% 2926 ± 18% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_count.30
> 563.25 ± 20% +140.3% 1353 ± 38% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.11
> 4297 ± 46% -49.1% 2186 ± 39% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.24
> 2828 ± 47% -47.8% 1475 ± 34% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.27
> 3243 ± 36% -54.3% 1482 ± 32% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.30
> 199.25 ± 6% +100.6% 399.75 ± 32% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.44
> 1158 ± 64% -67.3% 379.00 ± 46% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.54
> 242.25 ± 21% +51.0% 365.75 ± 19% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.55
> 1009 ± 26% -50.8% 496.50 ± 44% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.59
> 1736 ± 53% -67.8% 559.25 ± 22% sched_debug.cpu.ttwu_local.9
>
>
> lkp-sbx04: Sandy Bridge-EX
> Memory: 64G
>
>
> perf-profile.cycles.futex_wake.do_futex.sys_futex.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
>
> 76 ++---------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | |
> 74 ++ .*.. .*..*..*.. .*.. .*.. .*.. .*.. .*..*..*..* |
> *..*. *..*..*. *..*. *.*. *. *. *. |
> | |
> 72 ++ |
> | |
> 70 ++ |
> | |
> 68 ++ |
> | |
> | O O O O O O O O O O O |
> 66 O+ O O O O O
> | O O O O O O O |
> 64 ++-------------O-------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
>
> will-it-scale.per_process_ops
>
> 6.6e+06 O+----O-O--O------------------------------------------------------+
> | O O O O O |
> 6.4e+06 ++ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
> | |
> 6.2e+06 ++ |
> 6e+06 ++ |
> | |
> 5.8e+06 ++ |
> | |
> 5.6e+06 ++ |
> 5.4e+06 ++ |
> | |
> 5.2e+06 ++ |
> *..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.*..*..*..*.* |
> 5e+06 ++----------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
> [*] bisect-good sample
> [O] bisect-bad sample
>
> To reproduce:
>
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git
> cd lkp-tests
> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
> bin/lkp run job.yaml
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ying Huang
> ---
> LKP_SERVER: inn
> LKP_CGI_PORT: 80
> LKP_CIFS_PORT: 139
> testcase: will-it-scale
> default-monitors:
> wait: activate-monitor
> kmsg:
> uptime:
> iostat:
> heartbeat:
> vmstat:
> numa-numastat:
> numa-vmstat:
> numa-meminfo:
> proc-vmstat:
> proc-stat:
> interval: 10
> meminfo:
> slabinfo:
> interrupts:
> lock_stat:
> latency_stats:
> softirqs:
> bdi_dev_mapping:
> diskstats:
> nfsstat:
> cpuidle:
> cpufreq-stats:
> turbostat:
> pmeter:
> sched_debug:
> interval: 60
> cpufreq_governor: performance
> default-watchdogs:
> oom-killer:
> watchdog:
> commit: 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90
> model: Sandy Bridge-EX
> nr_cpu: 64
> memory: 64G
> nr_ssd_partitions: 7
> ssd_partitions: "/dev/disk/by-id/ata-INTEL_SSDSC2*-part1"
> swap_partitions:
> category: benchmark
> perf-profile:
> freq: 800
> will-it-scale:
> test: futex1
> queue: bisect
> testbox: lkp-sbx04
> tbox_group: lkp-sbx04
> kconfig: x86_64-rhel
> enqueue_time: 2016-02-28 23:45:52.199165563 +08:00
> compiler: gcc-4.9
> rootfs: debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz
> id: 6b2c2bd744dd898009648cb82de7e0ba77de33f1
> user: lkp
> head_commit: ed520c327c4259ec08b1677023087f658329b961
> base_commit: 81f70ba233d5f660e1ea5fe23260ee323af5d53a
> branch: linux-devel/devel-hourly-2016022811
> result_root: "/result/will-it-scale/performance-futex1/lkp-sbx04/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/0"
> job_file: "/lkp/scheduled/lkp-sbx04/bisect_will-it-scale-performance-futex1-debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz-x86_64-rhel-65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90-20160228-23650-17c4qc1-0.yaml"
> max_uptime: 1500
> initrd: "/osimage/debian/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz"
> bootloader_append:
> - root=/dev/ram0
> - user=lkp
> - job=/lkp/scheduled/lkp-sbx04/bisect_will-it-scale-performance-futex1-debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz-x86_64-rhel-65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90-20160228-23650-17c4qc1-0.yaml
> - ARCH=x86_64
> - kconfig=x86_64-rhel
> - branch=linux-devel/devel-hourly-2016022811
> - commit=65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90
> - BOOT_IMAGE=/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/vmlinuz-4.5.0-rc3-00235-g65d8fc7
> - max_uptime=1500
> - RESULT_ROOT=/result/will-it-scale/performance-futex1/lkp-sbx04/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/0
> - LKP_SERVER=inn
> - |2-
>
>
> earlyprintk=ttyS0,115200 systemd.log_level=err
> debug apic=debug sysrq_always_enabled rcupdate.rcu_cpu_stall_timeout=100
> panic=-1 softlockup_panic=1 nmi_watchdog=panic oops=panic load_ramdisk=2 prompt_ramdisk=0
> console=ttyS0,115200 console=tty0 vga=normal
>
> rw
> lkp_initrd: "/lkp/lkp/lkp-x86_64.cgz"
> modules_initrd: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/modules.cgz"
> bm_initrd: "/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lkp.cgz,/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/run-ipconfig.cgz,/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/turbostat.cgz,/lkp/benchmarks/turbostat.cgz,/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/will-it-scale.cgz,/lkp/benchmarks/will-it-scale.cgz,/lkp/benchmarks/will-it-scale-x86_64.cgz"
> linux_headers_initrd: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/linux-headers.cgz"
> repeat_to: 2
> kernel: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90/vmlinuz-4.5.0-rc3-00235-g65d8fc7"
> dequeue_time: 2016-02-28 23:46:33.938915178 +08:00
> job_state: finished
> loadavg: 45.27 20.12 7.84 2/649 11559
> start_time: '1456674445'
> end_time: '1456674754'
> version: "/lkp/lkp/.src-20160226-194908"
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu10/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu11/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu12/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu13/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu14/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu15/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu16/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu17/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu18/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu19/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu20/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu21/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu22/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu23/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu24/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu25/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu26/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu27/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu28/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu29/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu30/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu31/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu32/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu33/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu34/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu35/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu36/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu37/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu38/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu39/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu40/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu41/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu42/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu43/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu44/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu45/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu46/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu47/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu48/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu49/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu50/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu51/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu52/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu53/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu54/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu55/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu56/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu57/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu58/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu59/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu60/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu61/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu62/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu63/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu8/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:24 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu9/cpufreq/scaling_governor
> 2016-02-28 23:47:25 ./runtest.py futex1 16 both 1 8 16 24 32 48 64
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-29 18:40 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r7zXA-63L-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1345608 |
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
>* kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
>> commit 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90 ("futex: Remove requirement for
>> lock_page() in get_futex_key()")
>
>I have asked for this before, but let me try again: could you _PLEASE_ make these
>emails more readable?
>
>For example what are the 'below changes'? Changes in the profile output? Profiles
>always change from run to run, so that alone is not informative.
>
>Also, there are a lot of changes - which ones prompted the email to be generated?
>
>All in one, this email is hard to parse, because it just dumps a lot of
>information with very little explanatory structure for someone not versed in their
>format. Please try to create an easy to parse 'story' that leads the reader
>towards what you want these emails to tell - not just a raw dump of seemingly
>unconnected pieces of data ...
>↓
>Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
>>
>>
>> =========================================================================================
>> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase:
>> gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lkp-sbx04/futex1/will-it-scale
If I'm reading this correctly, it is similar to what I measured wrt ~lockleless get_futex_key()
stuff using the perf runs, with similar performance improvement numbers (per process/thread ops).
The futex1 test will just pound on FUTEX_WAKE without anyone actually blocked on a futex, so it
mainly measures the key/hashing part of the operation.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-03-01 09:40 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [LKP] [lkp] [futex] 65d8fc777f: +25.6% will-it-scale.per_process_ops |
| Message-ID | <r7O0y-6Eu-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1345608 |
Hi, Ingo,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> writes:
> * kernel test robot <ying.huang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
>> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
>> commit 65d8fc777f6dcfee12785c057a6b57f679641c90 ("futex: Remove requirement for
>> lock_page() in get_futex_key()")
>
> I have asked for this before, but let me try again: could you _PLEASE_ make these
> emails more readable?
>
> For example what are the 'below changes'? Changes in the profile output? Profiles
> always change from run to run, so that alone is not informative.
>
> Also, there are a lot of changes - which ones prompted the email to be generated?
>
> All in one, this email is hard to parse, because it just dumps a lot of
> information with very little explanatory structure for someone not versed in their
> format. Please try to create an easy to parse 'story' that leads the reader
> towards what you want these emails to tell - not just a raw dump of seemingly
> unconnected pieces of data ...
Your input are valuable for us. We are discussing how to improve our
reporting to be helpful for kernel developers. Will go back to you soon
on this.
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web