Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 16 Dec 2019 15:56:24 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [Patch v6 0/7] Introduce Thermal Pressure |
| |
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 11:11:41PM -0500, Thara Gopinath wrote: > Test Results > > Hackbench: 1 group , 30000 loops, 10 runs > Result SD > (Secs) (% of mean) > No Thermal Pressure 14.03 2.69% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 32 ms 13.29 0.56% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 64 ms 12.57 1.56% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 128 ms 12.71 1.04% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 256 ms 12.29 1.42% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 512 ms 12.42 1.15% > > Dhrystone Run Time : 20 threads, 3000 MLOOPS > Result SD > (Secs) (% of mean) > No Thermal Pressure 9.452 4.49% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 32 ms 8.793 5.30% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 64 ms 8.981 5.29% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 128 ms 8.647 6.62% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 256 ms 8.774 6.45% > Thermal Pressure PELT Algo. Decay : 512 ms 8.603 5.41%
What is the conclusion, if any from these results? Clearly thermal pressuse seems to help, but what window? ISTR we default to 32ms, which is a wash for drystone, but sub-optimal for hackbench.
Anyway, the patches look more or less acceptible, just a bunch of nits, the biggest being the fact that even if an architecture does not support this there is still the code and runtime overhead.
|  |