On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 12:42:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:Peter, I'm seeing regressions for
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 02:39:40AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:Jirka, what kind of setup were you seeing SPECjbb regressions?
On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 13:24:05 +0800Let me see if I can still find my SPECjbb2005 copy to see what that
Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
FYI, we noticed the below changes onHi Aaron,
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
commit a43455a1d572daf7b730fe12eb747d1e17411365 ("sched/numa: Ensure task_numa_migrate() checks the preferred node")
ebe06187bf2aec1 a43455a1d572daf7b730fe12e
--------------- -------------------------
94500 ~ 3% +115.6% 203711 ~ 6% ivb42/hackbench/50%-threads-pipe
67745 ~ 4% +64.1% 111174 ~ 5% lkp-snb01/hackbench/50%-threads-socket
162245 ~ 3% +94.1% 314885 ~ 6% TOTAL proc-vmstat.numa_hint_faults_local
Jirka Hladky has reported a regression with that changeset as
well, and I have already spent some time debugging the issue.
does.
I'm not seeing any on 2 sockets with a single SPECjbb instance, I'll go
check one instance per socket now.
Attachment:
SPECjbb2005_-127.el7numafixes9.png
Description: PNG image