Messages in this thread | | | From | Ankur Arora <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/30] PREEMPT_AUTO: support lazy rescheduling | Date | Tue, 27 Feb 2024 09:45:42 -0800 |
| |
Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@amd.com> writes:
> On 2/23/2024 11:58 AM, Raghavendra K T wrote: >> On 2/23/2024 8:44 AM, Ankur Arora wrote: >>> >>> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> writes: >>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 21 2024 at 22:57, Raghavendra K T wrote: >>>>> On 2/21/2024 10:45 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 21 2024 at 17:53, Raghavendra K T wrote: >>>>>>> Configuration tested. >>>>>>> a) Base kernel (6.7), >>>>>> >>>>>> Which scheduling model is the baseline using? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> baseline is also PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with voluntary preemption >>>>> >>>>>>> b) patched with PREEMPT_AUTO voluntary preemption. >>>>>>> c) patched with PREEMPT_DYNAMIC voluntary preemption. >>>> >>>> Which RCU variant do you have enabled with a, b, c ? >>>> >>>> I.e. PREEMPT_RCU=? >>> >>> Raghu please confirm this, but if the defaults were chosen >>> then we should have: >>> >>>>> baseline is also PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with voluntary preemption >>> PREEMPT_RCU=y >>> >>>>>>> b) patched with PREEMPT_AUTO voluntary preemption. >>> >>> If this was built with PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY then, PREEMPT_RCU=n. >>> If with CONFIG_PREEMPT, PREEMPT_RCU=y. >>> >>> Might be worth rerunning the tests with the other combination >>> as well (still with voluntary preemption). >>> >>>>>>> c) patched with PREEMPT_DYNAMIC voluntary preemption. >>> PREEMPT_RCU=y >> Hello Thomas, Ankur, >> Yes, Ankur's understanding is right, defaults were chosen all the time so >> for >> a) base 6.7.0+ + PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with voluntary preemption PREEMPT_RCU=y >> b) patched + PREEMPT_AUTO voluntary preemption. PREEMPT_RCU = n >> c) patched + PREEMPT_DYNAMIC with voluntary preemption PREEMPT_RCU=y > >> I will check with other combination (CONFIG_PREEMPT/PREEMPT_RCU) for (b) >> and comeback if I see anything interesting. >> > > I see that > > d) patched + PREEMPT_AUTO=y voluntary preemption CONFIG_PREEMPT, PREEMPT_RCU = y > > All the results at 80% confidence > case (d) > HashJoin 0% > Graph500 0% > XSBench +1.2% > NAS-ft +2.1% > > In general averages are better for all the benchmarks but at 99% > confidence there seem to be no difference. > > Overall looks on par or better for case (d)
Thanks for running all of these Raghu. The numbers look pretty good (better than I expected honestly).
-- ankur
| |