Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 03/16] sched: Wrap rq::lock access
To:     Julien Desfossez <jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, mingo@kernel.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, pjt@google.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
        torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        fweisbec@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org, kerrnel@google.com,
        Vineeth Pillai <vpillai@digitalocean.com>,
        Nishanth Aravamudan <naravamudan@digitalocean.com>
References: <fcad329b-e421-624a-0d1a-a98466eaf2ed@oracle.com>
 <1553866527-18879-1-git-send-email-jdesfossez@digitalocean.com>
 <6e8e6fa0-8976-5e97-d90c-af0b4a6fc8b2@oracle.com>
 <cd11cde9-4aed-b02f-cae5-170bb6fa686b@oracle.com>
 <20190403201634.GA4192@sinkpad>
From:   Subhra Mazumdar <subhra.mazumdar@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <4bc8cd35-5132-d717-d952-9ef90189345d@oracle.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Apr 2019 18:30:45 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190403201634.GA4192@sinkpad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> We tried to comment those lines and it doesn’t seem to get rid of the
> performance regression we are seeing.
> Can you elaborate a bit more about the test you are performing, what kind of
> resources it uses ?
I am running 1 and 2 Oracle DB instances each running TPC-C workload. The
clients driving the instances also run in same node. Each server client
pair is put in each cpu group and tagged.
> Can you also try to replicate our test and see if you see the same problem ?
>
> cgcreate -g cpu,cpuset:set1
> cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu{0,2,4,6}/topology/thread_siblings_list
> 0,36
> 2,38
> 4,40
> 6,42
>
> echo "0,2,4,6,36,38,40,42" | sudo tee /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/set1/cpuset.cpus
> echo 0 | sudo tee /sys/fs/cgroup/cpuset/set1/cpuset.mems
>
> echo 1 | sudo tee /sys/fs/cgroup/cpu,cpuacct/set1/cpu.tag
>
> sysbench --test=fileio prepare
> cgexec -g cpu,cpuset:set1 sysbench --threads=4 --test=fileio \
> --file-test-mode=seqwr run
>
> The reason we create a cpuset is to narrow down the investigation to just 4
> cores on a highly powerful machine. It might not be needed if testing on a
> smaller machine.
With this sysbench test I am not seeing any improvement with removing the
condition. Also with hackbench I found it makes no difference but that has
much lower regression to begin with (18%)
>
> Julien