* David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I confirm that numa/core regresses significantly more without
> thp than the 6.3% regression I reported with thp in terms of
> throughput on the same system. numa/core at 01aa90068b12
> ("sched: Use the best-buddy 'ideal cpu' in balancing
> decisions") had 99389.49 SPECjbb2005 bops whereas ec05a2311c35
> ("Merge branch 'sched/urgent' into sched/core") had 122246.90
> SPECjbb2005 bops, a 23.0% regression.
What is the base performance figure with THP disabled? Your
baseline was:
sched/core at ec05a2311c35: 136918.34 SPECjbb2005
Would be interesting to see how that kernel reacts to THP off.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>