On 6/21/22 05:10, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
I am expecting the words are:
I would like to see benchmarks we can agree are useful being done by a
'trusted' third party versus a site (or at least does Apples to Apples
comparisons of Alma 9 vs CS9 vs Fedora 34 and Alma8 vs CS8 vs Fedora
29 etc ).
I'm being a *little* glib in reply to a comment that attributes the
performance difference between Clear and Fedora as merely the power
management configuration without presenting evidence, but demands
benchmarks before considering that they might be the result of the
targeted CPU microarchitecture. There's a certain humorous irony, I
think, in demanding benchmarks in the context of a discussion about
benchmarks that include Fedora Server 36 and CS 9.
To be less glib: Of course I think that benchmarks are warranted and
interesting. In particular, while we do have a distro (CS 9) entirely
built for x86_64-v2, the Fedora community has been clear that they are
not willing to consider that step yet. We don't have an example of a
distro that uses glibc hwcaps for more targeted optimization, and I
think we would naturally want that before discussing whether Fedora
should ship additional optimized libraries. But while there is an open
question of whether hwcaps would deliver the benefits of targeting a
newer microarchitecture, I think we should acknowledge that there is
relatively good evidence that those benefits exist.
Clear Linux also seems to carry various out of band patches to the
kernel, systemd and other places to speed things up so I expect it is
more than just throwing the CPU into performance mode.
https://github.com/clearlinux-pkgs/linux
https://docs.01.org/clearlinux/latest/guides/clear/performance.html
I've read their kernel patch set in the past, and at the time the vast
majority of patches weren't performance focused at all, they looked like
they were just cherry-picked fixes that weren't yet in a current
release. They also describe patches to glibc, llvm, and gcc that
upstream developers haven't accepted yet.
But there's a reason that I think most of that is irrelevant. Clear
Linux and RHEL 9 both are built for a CPU microarchitecture that
includes SSE2, and both of those (if we accept CS 9 as a substitue for
RHEL in this context) have relatively similar results in the benchmarks
on Phoronix. CentOS Stream doesn't have most of the other patches
present in Clear Linux, which suggests that the CPU microarchitecture is
the most likely factor in their performance advantage. I think that
suggests that we should try to find out how much of that advantage we
can deliver in Fedora with optimized libraries and glibc hwcaps.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
