Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Zhang, Yanmin
Date: Thursday, March 13, 2008 - 10:28 pm

On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 11:30 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
On tigerton, if I add "slub_max_order=3 slub_min_objects=16" to kernel boot cmdline,
the result is improved significantly and it takes just 1/10 time of the original testing.

Below is the new output of slabino -AD.

Name                   Objects    Alloc     Free   %Fast
:0000192                  3192 80087199 80084141  92   8
kmalloc-512                773 80016203 80015888  97   9
vm_area_struct            2787   223100   220525  94  17
:0004096                    68   118322   118320  99  98
:0000064                 12215   123575   111669  98  42
:0000128                  4616    53826    49422  97  45
dentry                   12373    49568    37286  95  65
:0000080                 12823    33755    21206  99  97


So kmalloc-512 is the key.


Then, I tested it on stoakley with the same kernel commandline. Improvement is about 50%.
One important thing is without the boot parameter, hackbench on stoakey takes only 1/4 time
of the one on tigerton. With the boot parameter, hackbench on tigerton is faster than the one
on stoakely.

Is it possible to initiate slub_min_objects based on possible cpu number? I mean,
cpu_possible_map(). We could calculate slub_min_objects by a formular.

-yanmin


--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 12:46 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Andrew Morton, (Thu Mar 13, 1:48 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 2:28 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Andrew Morton, (Thu Mar 13, 2:52 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Greg KH, (Thu Mar 13, 8:14 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Randy Dunlap, (Thu Mar 13, 9:19 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Greg KH, (Thu Mar 13, 10:12 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Thu Mar 13, 5:16 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 5:50 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 8:04 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 8:30 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Greg KH, (Thu Mar 13, 10:01 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 10:28 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Thu Mar 13, 10:32 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Thu Mar 13, 11:32 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Thu Mar 13, 11:34 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Thu Mar 13, 11:39 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Fri Mar 14, 12:14 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Fri Mar 14, 12:23 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Fri Mar 14, 12:29 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Mar 14, 2:05 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Mar 14, 2:06 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Mar 14, 2:08 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Fri Mar 14, 5:15 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Sun Mar 16, 8:05 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Sun Mar 16, 8:35 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Mon Mar 17, 12:50 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Mon Mar 17, 10:27 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Mon Mar 17, 10:32 am)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Zhang, Yanmin, (Mon Mar 17, 8:28 pm)
Re: hackbench regression since 2.6.25-rc, Christoph Lameter, (Mon Mar 17, 9:07 pm)