On Sat, Feb 21, 2026 at 08:14:17AM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: [...]
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 04:47:38PM +0000, Leo Yan wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2026 at 09:34:14PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > Run 3 iterations, and measures three metrics (messaging/pipe/seccomp) > > > > > and results in seconds. Less is better. > > > > > > > > > > +---------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ > > > > > |Without change | run1 | run2 | run3 | avg | > > > > > +---------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ > > > > > |messaging (sec) | 4.546 | 4.508 | 4.591 | 4.548 | > > > > > |pipe (sec) | 24.258 | 24.224 | 24.017 | 24.166 | > > > > > |seccomp-notify (sec) | 48.393 | 48.457 | 48.232 | 48.361 | > > > > > +---------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ > > > > > > > > > > +---------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ > > > > > |With change | run1 | run2 | run3 | avg | diff | > > > > > +---------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ > > > > > |messaging (sec) | 4.493 | 4.523 | 4.556 | 4.524 | +0.52% | > > > > > |pipe (sec) | 23.159 | 23.702 | 28.649 | 25.170 | -4.15% | > > > > > > > > If you check the result, this result variance is abnormal, it means > > > > your OS is noiser. > > > > > > BTW: if you remove the abnormal run3 result, you'll find that the > > > benchmark is improved by ~3.5% on CA73: > > > (23.159 + 23.702) / 2 = 23.43 > > > (24.258 + 24.224) / 2 = 24.24 > > > (24.24 - 23.43)*100 / 23.43 = ~3.5 > > > > TBH, I don't think we should subjectively select data. But I agree a > > The precondition of this is testing the benchmark properly. And I just > tried perf bench sched in noisy OS, I didn't get the similar abnormal > variance as you got, so I think your run3 result was CA53's result. > This isn't an apple-to-apple comparison. Not true. As said, I tested on CA73. I should say explicitly that I have hotplugged off CA53 CPUs and run test only on CA73 CPUs. > If possible, could you plz test after forcing CA53 offline or test on > non big.little platform. Anyway, I will test CA73 next week too. > > > clean test env is important to avoid noise, and I also agree that the > > current results already show positive signals. > > > > Thanks, > > Leo
