Re: [PATCH] sched: fair: don't depend on wake_wide if waker and wakee are already in same LLC

From: Mel Gorman
Date: Thu May 27 2021 - 08:14:16 EST


On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 09:38:19PM +0000, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> > And no supportive numbers...
>
> Sorry for the confusion.
>
> I actually put some supportive numbers at the below thread which
> derived this patch:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/bbc339cef87e4009b6d56ee37e202daf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> when I tried to give Dietmar some pgbench data in that thread,
> I found in kunpeng920, while software ran in one die/numa with
> 24cores sharing LLC, disabling wake_wide() brought the best
> pgbench result.
>
> llc_as_factor don't_use_wake_wide
> Hmean 1 10869.27 ( 0.00%) 10723.08 * -1.34%*
> Hmean 8 19580.59 ( 0.00%) 19469.34 * -0.57%*
> Hmean 12 29643.56 ( 0.00%) 29520.16 * -0.42%*
> Hmean 24 43194.47 ( 0.00%) 43774.78 * 1.34%*
> Hmean 32 40163.23 ( 0.00%) 40742.93 * 1.44%*
> Hmean 48 42249.29 ( 0.00%) 48329.00 * 14.39%*
>
> The test was done by https://github.com/gormanm/mmtests
> and
> ./run-mmtests.sh --config ./configs/config-db-pgbench-timed-ro-medium test_tag
>

Out of curiousity, I briefly tested this on a Zen2 machine which also
has multiple LLCs per node. Only tbench4 was executed and I cancelled
the other tests because of results like this

tbench4
5.13.0-rc2 5.13.0-rc2
vanilla sched-nowakewidellc-v1r1
Hmean 1 349.34 ( 0.00%) 334.18 * -4.34%*
Hmean 2 668.49 ( 0.00%) 659.12 * -1.40%*
Hmean 4 1307.90 ( 0.00%) 1274.35 * -2.57%*
Hmean 8 2482.08 ( 0.00%) 2377.84 * -4.20%*
Hmean 16 4460.06 ( 0.00%) 4656.28 * 4.40%*
Hmean 32 9463.76 ( 0.00%) 8909.61 * -5.86%*
Hmean 64 15865.30 ( 0.00%) 19682.77 * 24.06%*
Hmean 128 24350.06 ( 0.00%) 21593.20 * -11.32%*
Hmean 256 39593.90 ( 0.00%) 31389.33 * -20.72%*
Hmean 512 37851.54 ( 0.00%) 30260.23 * -20.06%*

--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs