Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:21 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Rik van Riel > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:21 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Rik van Riel > wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, 2016-04-10

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: >> > >> > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > Should the default idle

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 2:38 PM, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: >> > >> > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > Should the default idle state not then be

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > > Should the default idle state not then be governor > > > dependent?  When I > > > set

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 05:04 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > > > > > Should the default idle state not then be governor > > > dependent?  When I > > > set

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Should the default idle state not then be governor dependent? When I > > set gov=performance, I'm expecting box to go just as fast as it can > > go > > without melting. Does

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 16:24 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Should the default idle state not then be governor dependent? When I > > set gov=performance, I'm expecting box to go just as fast as it can > > go > > without melting. Does

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra > g> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki > > >

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 17:39 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra > g> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra > wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Fri,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:31 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra > wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 11:35 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 05:44 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith < > > umgwanakikb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > > >

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 11:35 +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 05:44 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith < > > umgwanakikb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > > >

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 05:44 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith < > umgwanakikb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > > interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. > > > > 714KHz/28.03Ws =

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sun, 2016-04-10 at 05:44 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith < > umgwanakikb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > > interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. > > > > 714KHz/28.03Ws =

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2106.04.09 20:45 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> >> Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second >> interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. >> >> 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 >> 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 >> >> ..for pipe-test,

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2106.04.09 20:45 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: >> >> Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second >> interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. >> >> 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 >> 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 >> >> ..for pipe-test,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. > > 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 > 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 > > ..for pipe-test, the tradeoff look a bit

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:39 PM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second > interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. > > 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 > 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 > > ..for pipe-test, the tradeoff look a bit more like red than green.

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 ..for pipe-test, the tradeoff look a bit more like red than green. -Mike

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

Hm, setting gov=performance, and taking the average of 3 30 second interval PkgWatt samples as pipe-test runs.. 714KHz/28.03Ws = 25.46 877KHz/30.28Ws = 28.96 ..for pipe-test, the tradeoff look a bit more like red than green. -Mike

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:33 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Mike Galbraith > wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Fri,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 14:33 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Mike Galbraith > wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > >> > > Cute, I thought

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > >> > > Cute, I thought you used

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > >> > > Cute, I thought

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> > >> > > Cute, I thought you used

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:19:14PM -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > Could you send me, or point me to, the program "pipe-test"? > So far, I have only found one, but it is both old and not > the same program you are running (based on print statements). The latest public one lives as: perf bench sched

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:19:14PM -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > Could you send me, or point me to, the program "pipe-test"? > So far, I have only found one, but it is both old and not > the same program you are running (based on print statements). The latest public one lives as: perf bench sched

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > > > I do, and those numbers are

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 10:59:59PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > > > I do, and those numbers are

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 00:17 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > I still didn't find the exact same program, but I think I found some > earlier version of the correct test. > > I get (long term average): > Kernel 4.4.0-17: Powersave 3.93 usecs/loop ; Performance 3.93 usecs/loop 0.89 > Kernel 4.5-rc7:

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Sat, 2016-04-09 at 00:17 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > I still didn't find the exact same program, but I think I found some > earlier version of the correct test. > > I get (long term average): > Kernel 4.4.0-17: Powersave 3.93 usecs/loop ; Performance 3.93 usecs/loop 0.89 > Kernel 4.5-rc7:

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2016.04.08 15:19 Doug Smythies wrote: > On 2016.04.08 14:00 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? >>> >>> I do,

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2016.04.08 15:19 Doug Smythies wrote: > On 2016.04.08 14:00 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >>> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? >>> >>> I do,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 15:19 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > Could you send me, or point me to, the program "pipe-test"? > So far, I have only found one, but it is both old and not > the same program you are running (based on print statements). It's the same old pipe-test, just bent up a little to

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 15:19 -0700, Doug Smythies wrote: > Could you send me, or point me to, the program "pipe-test"? > So far, I have only found one, but it is both old and not > the same program you are running (based on print statements). It's the same old pipe-test, just bent up a little to

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > > > I do, and those numbers are with

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 22:59 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > > > I do, and those numbers are with

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2016.04.08 14:00 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >>> Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? >> >> I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. > Well,

RE: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On 2016.04.08 14:00 Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: >> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >>> Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? >> >> I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. > Well,

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. Well, this is a trade-off. 4.5 introduced a power

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Friday, April 08, 2016 08:50:54 AM Mike Galbraith wrote: > On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? > > I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. Well, this is a trade-off. 4.5 introduced a power

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. -Mike

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 08:45 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Cute, I thought you used governor=performance for your runs? I do, and those numbers are with it thus set. -Mike

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 07:20:54AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Greetings, > > While measuring current NO_HZ cost to light tasks jabbering cross core > at high frequency (~7% max), I noticed that master lost an improvement > for same acquired in 4.5, so bisected it. > > 4.5.0 > homer:~ #

Re: [regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 07:20:54AM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > Greetings, > > While measuring current NO_HZ cost to light tasks jabbering cross core > at high frequency (~7% max), I noticed that master lost an improvement > for same acquired in 4.5, so bisected it. > > 4.5.0 > homer:~ #

[regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

Greetings, While measuring current NO_HZ cost to light tasks jabbering cross core at high frequency (~7% max), I noticed that master lost an improvement for same acquired in 4.5, so bisected it. 4.5.0 homer:~ # taskset 0xc pipe-test 1 2.367681 usecs/loop -- avg 2.367681 844.7 KHz 2.372502

[regression] cross core scheduling frequency drop bisected to 0c313cb20732

Greetings, While measuring current NO_HZ cost to light tasks jabbering cross core at high frequency (~7% max), I noticed that master lost an improvement for same acquired in 4.5, so bisected it. 4.5.0 homer:~ # taskset 0xc pipe-test 1 2.367681 usecs/loop -- avg 2.367681 844.7 KHz 2.372502