Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753419AbaBYT1V (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:27:21 -0500 Received: from g2t1383g.austin.hp.com ([15.217.136.92]:42663 "EHLO g2t1383g.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752936AbaBYT1U (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:27:20 -0500 Message-ID: <1393356413.7727.27.camel@j-VirtualBox> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] locking/core patches From: Jason Low To: Andrew Morton Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Waiman Long , mingo@kernel.org, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de, riel@redhat.com, davidlohr@hp.com, hpa@zytor.com, andi@firstfloor.org, aswin@hp.com, scott.norton@hp.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 11:26:53 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20140210150230.b7f46688093ebc5c45fee870@linux-foundation.org> References: <20140210195820.834693028@infradead.org> <20140210150230.b7f46688093ebc5c45fee870@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 15:02 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 20:58:20 +0100 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I would propose merging the following patches... > > > > The first set is mostly from Jason and tweaks the mutex adaptive > > spinning, AIM7 throughput numbers: > > > > PRE: 100 2000.04 21564.90 2721.29 311.99 3.12 0.01 0.00 99 > > POST: 100 2000.04 42603.85 5142.80 311.99 3.12 0.00 0.00 99 > > What do these columns represent? I'm guessing the large improvement > was in context switches? Hello, I also re-tested the mutex patches 1-6 on my 2 and 8 socket machines with the high_systime and fserver AIM7 workloads (ran on disk). The workloads are able to generate contention on the &EXT4_SB(inode->i_sb)->s_orphan_lock mutex. Below are the % improvement in throughput with the patches on a recent tip kernel. The main benefits were on the larger box and when there were higher number of users. Note: the -0.7% drop in performance for fserver at 10-90 users on the 2 socket machine was mainly due to "[PATCH 6/8] mutex: Extra reschedule point". Without patch 6, there was almost no % difference in throughput between the baseline kernel and kernel with patches 1-5. 8 socket machine: -------------------------- fserver -------------------------- users | % improvement | in throughput | with patches -------------------------- 1000-2000 | +29.2% -------------------------- 100-900 | +10.0% -------------------------- 10-90 | +0.4% -------------------------- high_systime -------------------------- users | % improvement | in throughput | with patches -------------------------- 1000-2000 | +34.9% -------------------------- 100-900 | +49.2% -------------------------- 10-90 | +3.1% 2 socket machine: -------------------------- fserver -------------------------- users | % improvement | in throughput | with patches -------------------------- 1000-2000 | +1.8% -------------------------- 100-900 | +0.0% -------------------------- 10-90 | -0.7% -------------------------- high_systime -------------------------- users | % improvement | in throughput | with patches -------------------------- 1000-2000 | +0.8% -------------------------- 100-900 | +0.4% -------------------------- 10-90 | +0.0% -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/