Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-93658-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240220171457.703-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240220171457.703-1-kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 10:44:50 +0100
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbxjU0r+PDTxJwrgzuJgaKnOCHtkaZtm4jO6bmFQ0SPiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/14] Introducing TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>, 
	Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, 
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, 
	Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>, Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>, 
	Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@arm.com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, 
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, x86@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi K Prateek,

I trimmed down the recipient list so we don't bounce.

On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 6:15=E2=80=AFPM K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd=
com> wrote:

> Same experiment was repeated on an dual socket ARM server (2 x 64C)
> which too saw a significant improvement in the ipistorm performance:
>
>   =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>   Test          : ipistorm (modified)
>   Units         : Normalized runtime
>   Interpretation: Lower is better
>   Statistic     : AMean
>   =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
>   kernel:                               time [pct imp]
>   tip:sched/core                        1.00 [0.00]
>   tip:sched/core + TIF_NOTIFY_IPI       0.41 [59.29]

Is that a 64bit ARM64 system or really an ARM 32-bit 64-core system?

I'm confused because:

> K Prateek Nayak (10):
>   arm/thread_info: Introduce TIF_NOTIFY_IPI flag

There is no arm64 patch in the patch series.

I can perhaps test the patches on an ARM32 system but all I have is dualcor=
e
I think.

Yours,
Linus Walleij