Re: x264 benchmarks BFS vs CFS

From: Mike Galbraith
Date: Fri Dec 18 2009 - 08:37:14 EST


On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 14:06 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Mike Galbraith <efault@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > I'm personally curious as to what kind of scheduler issues this results
> > > in--I haven't done any BFS vs CFS tests with this option enabled yet.
> >
> > I'll look for x264 source, and patch/piddle.
>
> btw., would be nice to look at it via tools/perf/ as well:
>
> perf stat --repeat 3 ...
>
> to see the basic hardware utilization (cycles/cache-misses, branch execution
> rate, instructions, etc.) and the basic parallelism metrics, at a glance.
>
> i suspect "perf stat -e L1-icache-loads -e L1-icache-load-misses" would give
> us an even more detailed picture.

Almost virgin v2.6.32-10468-g020307d running 'medium'.

encoded 600 frames, 36.52 fps, 13003.54 kb/s

Performance counter stats for './x264.sh 8' (3 runs):

63742.218844 task-clock-msecs # 3.870 CPUs ( +- 0.016% )
42593 context-switches # 0.001 M/sec ( +- 0.487% )
3011 CPU-migrations # 0.000 M/sec ( +- 0.417% )
12862 page-faults # 0.000 M/sec ( +- 0.004% )
151734450892 cycles # 2380.439 M/sec ( +- 1.947% ) (scaled from 71.44%)
205642315207 instructions # 1.355 IPC ( +- 0.085% ) (scaled from 80.68%)
16274905932 branches # 255.324 M/sec ( +- 0.080% ) (scaled from 80.67%)
1257135617 branch-misses # 7.724 % ( +- 0.255% ) (scaled from 80.06%)
3116653323 cache-references # 48.895 M/sec ( +- 0.340% ) (scaled from 23.78%)
50823973 cache-misses # 0.797 M/sec ( +- 1.400% ) (scaled from 23.76%)

16.470164901 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.079% )

encoded 600 frames, 36.58 fps, 13003.54 kb/s

Performance counter stats for './x264.sh 8' (3 runs):

133692266953 L1-icache-loads ( +- 0.027% )
997371592 L1-icache-load-misses ( +- 0.009% )

16.407060367 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.036% )


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/