Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 22 Oct 2020 09:19:15 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To:     Xing Zhengjun <zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com>,
        Anton Blanchard <anton@au.ibm.com>, anton@ozlabs.org
Cc:     Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        0day robot <lkp@intel.com>, lkp <lkp@lists.01.org>,
        zhengjun xing <zhengjun.xing@intel.com>,
        aubrey li <aubrey.li@linux.intel.com>,
        yu c chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Message-ID: <1597497813.35294.1603372755111.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <e2eb8ed0-1075-3c5d-207e-d218a59c2a9f@linux.intel.com>
References: <20201002083311.GK393@shao2-debian> <1183082664.11002.1602082242482.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <7131f8f9-68d1-0277-c770-c10f98a062ec@linux.intel.com> <510309749.29852.1603199662203.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <e2eb8ed0-1075-3c5d-207e-d218a59c2a9f@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [sched] bdfcae1140: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
 -37.0% regression
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: bdfcae1140: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -37.0% regression
Thread-Index: YJbUcUrA024P7c/g6sWwOrLYCUpVqg==
Precedence: bulk

----- On Oct 21, 2020, at 9:54 PM, Xing Zhengjun zhengjun.xing@linux.intel.com wrote:
[...]
> In fact, 0-day just copy the will-it-scale benchmark from the GitHub, if
> you think the will-it-scale benchmark has some issues, you can
> contribute your idea and help to improve it, later we will update the
> will-it-scale benchmark to the new version.

This is why I CC'd the maintainer of the will-it-scale github project, Anton Blanchard.
My main intent is to report this issue to him, but I have not heard back from him yet.
Is this project maintained ? Let me try to add his ozlabs.org address in CC.

> For this test case, if we bind the workload to a specific CPU, then it
> will hide the scheduler balance issue. In the real world, we seldom bind
> the CPU...

When you say that you bind the workload to a specific CPU, is that done
outside of the will-it-scale testsuite, thus limiting the entire testsuite
to a single CPU, or you expect that internally the will-it-scale context-switch1
test gets affined to a single specific CPU/core/hardware thread through use of
hwloc ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com