On 2019/4/29 14:14, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Li, Aubrey <aubrey...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> 
>>> I suspect it's pretty low, below 1% for all rows?
>>
>> Hope my this mail box works for this...
>>
>> .-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
>> |NA/AVX vanilla-SMT     [std% / sem%] | coresched-SMT   [std% / sem%]     
>> +/- |  no-SMT [std% / sem%]    +/-  |
>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>> |  1/1        508.5     [ 0.2%/ 0.0%] |         504.7   [ 1.1%/ 0.1%]    
>> -0.8%|   509.0 [ 0.2%/ 0.0%]    0.1% |
>> |  2/2       1000.2     [ 1.4%/ 0.1%] |        1004.1   [ 1.6%/ 0.2%]     
>> 0.4%|   997.6 [ 1.2%/ 0.1%]   -0.3% |
>> |  4/4       1912.1     [ 1.0%/ 0.1%] |        1904.2   [ 1.1%/ 0.1%]    
>> -0.4%|  1914.9 [ 1.3%/ 0.1%]    0.1% |
>> |  8/8       3753.5     [ 0.3%/ 0.0%] |        3748.2   [ 0.3%/ 0.0%]    
>> -0.1%|  3751.3 [ 0.4%/ 0.0%]   -0.1% |
>> | 16/16      7139.3     [ 2.4%/ 0.2%] |        7137.9   [ 1.8%/ 0.2%]    
>> -0.0%|  7049.2 [ 2.4%/ 0.2%]   -1.3% |
>> | 32/32     10899.0     [ 4.2%/ 0.4%] |       10780.3   [ 4.4%/ 0.4%]    
>> -1.1%| 10339.2 [ 9.6%/ 0.9%]   -5.1% |
>> | 64/64     15086.1     [11.5%/ 1.2%] |       14262.0   [ 8.2%/ 0.8%]    
>> -5.5%| 11168.7 [22.2%/ 1.7%]  -26.0% |
>> |128/128    15371.9     [22.0%/ 2.2%] |       14675.8   [14.4%/ 1.4%]    
>> -4.5%| 10963.9 [18.5%/ 1.4%]  -28.7% |
>> |256/256    15990.8     [22.0%/ 2.2%] |       12227.9   [10.3%/ 1.0%]   
>> -23.5%| 10469.9 [19.6%/ 1.7%]  -34.5% |
>> '-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'
> 
> Perfectly presented, thank you very much!

My pleasure! ;-)

> 
> My final questin would be about the environment:
> 
>> Skylake server, 2 numa nodes, 104 CPUs (HT on)
> 
> Is the typical nr_running value the sum of 'NA+AVX', i.e. is it ~256 
> threads for the 128/128 row for example - or is it 128 parallel tasks?

That means 128 sysbench threads and 128 gemmbench tasks, so 256 threads in sum.
> 
> I.e. showing the approximate CPU thread-load figure column would be very 
> useful too, where '50%' shows half-loaded, '100%' fully-loaded, '200%' 
> over-saturated, etc. - for each row?

See below, hope this helps.
.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|NA/AVX vanilla-SMT     [std% / sem%]     cpu% |coresched-SMT   [std% / sem%]   
  +/-     cpu% |  no-SMT [std% / sem%]   +/-      cpu% |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  1/1        508.5     [ 0.2%/ 0.0%]     2.1% |        504.7   [ 1.1%/ 0.1%]   
 -0.8%    2.1% |   509.0 [ 0.2%/ 0.0%]   0.1%     4.3% |
|  2/2       1000.2     [ 1.4%/ 0.1%]     4.1% |       1004.1   [ 1.6%/ 0.2%]   
  0.4%    4.1% |   997.6 [ 1.2%/ 0.1%]  -0.3%     8.1% |
|  4/4       1912.1     [ 1.0%/ 0.1%]     7.9% |       1904.2   [ 1.1%/ 0.1%]   
 -0.4%    7.9% |  1914.9 [ 1.3%/ 0.1%]   0.1%    15.1% |
|  8/8       3753.5     [ 0.3%/ 0.0%]    14.9% |       3748.2   [ 0.3%/ 0.0%]   
 -0.1%   14.9% |  3751.3 [ 0.4%/ 0.0%]  -0.1%    30.5% |
| 16/16      7139.3     [ 2.4%/ 0.2%]    30.3% |       7137.9   [ 1.8%/ 0.2%]   
 -0.0%   30.3% |  7049.2 [ 2.4%/ 0.2%]  -1.3%    60.4% |
| 32/32     10899.0     [ 4.2%/ 0.4%]    60.3% |      10780.3   [ 4.4%/ 0.4%]   
 -1.1%   55.9% | 10339.2 [ 9.6%/ 0.9%]  -5.1%    97.7% |
| 64/64     15086.1     [11.5%/ 1.2%]    97.7% |      14262.0   [ 8.2%/ 0.8%]   
 -5.5%   82.0% | 11168.7 [22.2%/ 1.7%] -26.0%   100.0% |
|128/128    15371.9     [22.0%/ 2.2%]   100.0% |      14675.8   [14.4%/ 1.4%]   
 -4.5%   82.8% | 10963.9 [18.5%/ 1.4%] -28.7%   100.0% |
|256/256    15990.8     [22.0%/ 2.2%]   100.0% |      12227.9   [10.3%/ 1.0%]   
-23.5%   73.2% | 10469.9 [19.6%/ 1.7%] -34.5%   100.0% |
'--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'

Thanks,
-Aubrey

Reply via email to