From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Mon Oct 9 01:03:56 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82479E447D0 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 01:03:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vk0-x236.google.com (mail-vk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3183F8228F for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 01:03:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: by mail-vk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id h63so12006723vka.4 for ; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 18:03:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=N+Y6DpVTl/RxZ7XRKG461Ik95HM1u01faqW73XXpkUg=; b=M5cpiag7Ern8KB2w8AhQzjDvdee4iLjrX+WnACVnYfp/g/oheKJTXYRhK9RkM0lE6w yzuz5qfbKTzKtLhQXJi0OnasAWV4dwGUFc2c1EZTlczy8JPThW1gCBSK6lCCpEBuenXC y1pWMSWoG9Ab/oxJUIrvKth0zymdFwNOMdYGh0sROberJlIj/o/NZu74NFBkrep3+VWn wXMLLTxbLAPqxqAymz2qJmtbLk9PEcp+HlJuJjI8TAPqnvK+TedqhwRFQGOFr/Pa768i jEuBOnpCmMCps164G1sGoWJJE/lzR78vOwqWLgnEVXytiS63XAQRFUFkm7DdAK3JGbjo WTFQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=N+Y6DpVTl/RxZ7XRKG461Ik95HM1u01faqW73XXpkUg=; b=RPF/Q0vNBBMxVww0cHBjESoBf0YbtHxWW5i69dBU4d2cNJ3YBt/Asy67jJeqUJwiCQ iWgm+wCCZncmwRslMds66DfiZq2eGHZJiybEQzbz8rFxp3RnE1Q/P5TtzdqsTPpd1NmW 1nhE3c4mspthgR+8OQm2d3g7/qgOtqme1N+kzFQQpbEqEn/s0XRhk3xaBIw34QoM05Wy 650SHfkrv5/L7+/jxn73trnm1VzSri93Onz0VCY6ZQx2nA6mNSZp0nzdtIOlQM4ej71X ASQG4CgGVabxd+uSwjs/BA81Qr49vSKokfZXVQeH1zD5cx9KhS22UQWf9Y/5KhpEBIlS x8EQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaWdFPGhCYM3rsOER+11GYGbI/eW0m1pYUavMRGn5x/G9jHfWkuV 41KWnxFDnXYqRK14FW8pkyfmNbBbqIXj95PSlPE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QD6Y3aUdrHFitN5ayfCG3slNhIcaEIz9eLdGB4xfrINTbNG7HTuUO2BSxiJafSvRY9AxYgzziqh3M7tf/e6ccM= X-Received: by 10.31.160.14 with SMTP id j14mr3964422vke.172.1507511034295; Sun, 08 Oct 2017 18:03:54 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.50.129 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Oct 2017 18:03:53 -0700 (PDT) From: grarpamp Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 21:03:53 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Xeon Gold 6138's Running FBSD 11.1 and TrueOS Stable [GCC 5.4] To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 01:03:56 -0000 http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=25148 While we have tested a number of Linux distributions on Intel's new Xeon Scalable platform, here are some initial BSD tests using two Xeon Gold 6138 processors with the Tyan GT24E-B7106 1U barebones server. FreeBSD 11.1 and the FreeBSD-derivative desktop/workstation-focused TrueOS (formerly known as PC-BSD) were the primary candidates for testing. TrueOS stable is currently tracking FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT development. When comparing the out-of-the-box performance of FreeBSD/TrueOS and even with running under the GCC compiler rather than LLVM Clang, the Linux distributions were offering noticeably better performance on this dual Intel Xeon Gold server. From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Mon Oct 9 02:42:13 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DD12E460D0 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 02:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from mx1.scaleengine.net (mx1.scaleengine.net [209.51.186.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CB1D7351C for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 02:42:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from allanjude@freebsd.org) Received: from [10.1.1.2] (unknown [209.51.186.28]) (Authenticated sender: allanjude.freebsd@scaleengine.com) by mx1.scaleengine.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF9FB139FA for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 02:42:05 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: Xeon Gold 6138's Running FBSD 11.1 and TrueOS Stable [GCC 5.4] To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org References: From: Allan Jude Message-ID: <43eb65d2-ffed-8216-17f8-7936932e5e0a@freebsd.org> Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2017 22:42:01 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="aGJ7MF0n9Nu1n75U5Qc5kO1nHWAItgdWC" X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 02:42:13 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --aGJ7MF0n9Nu1n75U5Qc5kO1nHWAItgdWC Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="M2Em6w51OdwJrXLOVNFsqBSFw66VM3ek3"; protected-headers="v1" From: Allan Jude To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Message-ID: <43eb65d2-ffed-8216-17f8-7936932e5e0a@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Xeon Gold 6138's Running FBSD 11.1 and TrueOS Stable [GCC 5.4] References: In-Reply-To: --M2Em6w51OdwJrXLOVNFsqBSFw66VM3ek3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2017-10-08 21:03, grarpamp wrote: > http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=3D25148 >=20 > While we have tested a number of Linux distributions on Intel's new > Xeon Scalable platform, here are some initial BSD tests using two Xeon > Gold 6138 processors with the Tyan GT24E-B7106 1U barebones server. > FreeBSD 11.1 and the FreeBSD-derivative desktop/workstation-focused > TrueOS (formerly known as PC-BSD) were the primary candidates for > testing. TrueOS stable is currently tracking FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT > development. > When comparing the out-of-the-box performance of FreeBSD/TrueOS and > even with running under the GCC compiler rather than LLVM Clang, the > Linux distributions were offering noticeably better performance on > this dual Intel Xeon Gold server. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freeb= sd.org" >=20 You might want to try enabling turbo boost. sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq=3D9999 This will change the cpu frequency from the default (2000 mhz) to 2001 mhz, which will enable turbo boost (this specific CPU bursts to 3700 mhz), so this will likely make a very large difference in your benchmarks= =2E To get more consistent results, you may actually want to disable turboboost in the bios, and rerun the benchmarks on ALL of the operating systems. --=20 Allan Jude --M2Em6w51OdwJrXLOVNFsqBSFw66VM3ek3-- --aGJ7MF0n9Nu1n75U5Qc5kO1nHWAItgdWC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJZ2uH8AAoJEBmVNT4SmAt+h58QAMkvKDTfJEXe9rRIvPo5CSKs dQc2lQ1fMxO4K+VcVZ/1q10r+qWUc5/lWUGpTvVK2AbV8cR3f6Vfh98QqF/fiFLA pW02vtpFUG9jY+UFxvkV45M5iCw+0KxiclksksF3JTfZNOLJOg4j1K3cgqN2X0Nx vuxSVajspECxQ8jMULmzhwM670nZPFChUjIpZ8gBbEeidHas0iy+vEi12hL9QCbP u7LawzFy2vZDcwstK0ZabM7f9YwAhBlXSMaY17yQgE7dSRyWBoS2jEKRZ35mF+Le W1lsF64GWZYk4VkJrHZlnuxs+BXuo5kNWigQ4nY/eAefyOhNMVWNrH1cBWaan+/h lA7zNDLWWP6uE2ijGCTqtcLT1bKWw+AkAr60rFsYB5ucxchn2KtUGtnfibLkM0vU UlhotR9EPuQInfT71QhTZdV/ZyPZxTv6a/QokKC0A/QpdxnNuja30fCsj/U/A3UE /RIu7FSITauG/QEH5QLus+uSl2LslwhjlZD2qSFEaU7VBsRFkFHo9JFxvuTwJm/J L2dL5sBgI7Vwke0XRYHoW0DGRlSO/wfjHeBOzQv5DLzzvlqiTajWYUxPSKSRjSxC xtc7AgRAQSebVfYxCluYiDQBgX6tJtgVmgVAfNUYmQY4+Yrq4FtpNTNKTCCTv/32 cXYesg1DOWWbMTgMEWGA =THfj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --aGJ7MF0n9Nu1n75U5Qc5kO1nHWAItgdWC-- From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Mon Oct 9 10:02:46 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D2EE2BA13 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:02:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartmann@walstatt.org) Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FD2971ADE; Mon, 9 Oct 2017 10:02:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ohartmann@walstatt.org) Received: from thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de ([77.180.190.132]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lusmr-1dJKO53rk1-0100Xh; Mon, 09 Oct 2017 12:02:37 +0200 Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 12:02:24 +0200 From: "O. Hartmann" To: Allan Jude Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Xeon Gold 6138's Running FBSD 11.1 and TrueOS Stable [GCC 5.4] Message-ID: <20171009120224.3f2ca1e6@thor.intern.walstatt.dynvpn.de> In-Reply-To: <43eb65d2-ffed-8216-17f8-7936932e5e0a@freebsd.org> References: <43eb65d2-ffed-8216-17f8-7936932e5e0a@freebsd.org> Organization: WALSTATT User-Agent: OutScare 3.1415926 X-Operating-System: ImNotAnOperatingSystem 3.141592527 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; boundary="Sig_/rePbvxrMaFY+S1D=Uv52lqZ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:c0biFXc0T8/o8w+zGvpzuHdf/5/OSy2YRaK8i5ian/3ZjMY0sgu kFPwIjHJ2CqxXHEbT+Fmi8h3cr9CTbTiK7f1zHZQCokb3K9GDPf5rGo+aJfItLvRXdaCtxe jtW2Fh1vaDOKRgg1d5eQ2Qqs2ys+ON2kY4tocl4SzScA8J6hqw3VNk3dxKp6F84c/P99eHE OnbQS2ZnAen/aRbjF0MCg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:eWZIKq+igJU=:CmmZHenZTWtdPZ02t37fpo dV0IoppRMdBVEnDQVEmUOsWTC4so+2nuCAywYJxq15awGYGJTHuwQMhIS2MMuf/WpErI5bEmx mc4jGCNI5FfQssgTWMpA2odTSRrUkMlNtdEZNzpi/76ZNXGzYCSfKNJGFUxcFFnh0Rmfn2ZdX RS+uIZ/P68tOQbLH2VA20X1YR5QdpHREkS9IECtxoZY9ulZqqgFkdNms/T2M7yiN5Qy1UO1j6 lmD5D5UvZkuL3n/4b4q+CrpJI0poCpiI8CNhSMpIVIe4OQNQ/fSFuLNjf2Flw3tF2KfbdE614 ADdY6CAX29hp+yo6FVCH59qVdeZPPc1IuiLrasIsAgmN/3fjOkV0Rc84CJxIDpxd47gXoJ1FT cUxS3K7d2GIeijOUMGx/7kGFh18+6Qg8T6zP2rvEwaoB7ycVH2SNmsNlCToj8wrqt9tJjOccn VnNtwnzmpsAupa9B0fOoVhzzfK0uMLqhzFmJOJG7Zdmo9Eno5rzwMjFsCrTpLRu6W98SfLyo+ TwfAu0u8T0afzxIjZ22ZMin9UwkScTPS6uQzl/bPaVNp84+dMAEjt3O1dA0CI6CliTWUM0hMD LTzrJPdwiFdBJRz6/M3e+pFbUCq01oUj4YzgT0kwuHW8xf68gkWNyrGoTWKVIHn+3lmpI7o5v Vs17n7NcEeYddRgYSQGgCNgEwr07NPTQbzJWfSQB9qTJhnviewoWk4FZKrVmjA1whAVOgPtMJ ZfV6TeHnGGaXIULM+D0RP/tUYSkWnzY8oQmkNlBtSd7GesqNdUvdShRS8ubDOo3w2I6JN9Mqs IES5ehaRrq5VzaEivuNb+/CVHmvMQ== X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2017 10:02:46 -0000 --Sig_/rePbvxrMaFY+S1D=Uv52lqZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am Sun, 8 Oct 2017 22:42:01 -0400 Allan Jude schrieb: > On 2017-10-08 21:03, grarpamp wrote: > > http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=3D25148 > >=20 > > While we have tested a number of Linux distributions on Intel's new > > Xeon Scalable platform, here are some initial BSD tests using two Xeon > > Gold 6138 processors with the Tyan GT24E-B7106 1U barebones server. > > FreeBSD 11.1 and the FreeBSD-derivative desktop/workstation-focused > > TrueOS (formerly known as PC-BSD) were the primary candidates for > > testing. TrueOS stable is currently tracking FreeBSD 12.0-CURRENT > > development. > > When comparing the out-of-the-box performance of FreeBSD/TrueOS and > > even with running under the GCC compiler rather than LLVM Clang, the > > Linux distributions were offering noticeably better performance on > > this dual Intel Xeon Gold server. > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freeb= sd.org" > > =20 >=20 > You might want to try enabling turbo boost. >=20 > sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq=3D9999 >=20 > This will change the cpu frequency from the default (2000 mhz) to 2001 > mhz, which will enable turbo boost (this specific CPU bursts to 3700 > mhz), so this will likely make a very large difference in your benchmarks. >=20 > To get more consistent results, you may actually want to disable > turboboost in the bios, and rerun the benchmarks on ALL of the operating > systems. >=20 Wow, the difference between the FreeBSDs and Linux performance is amazing a= nd for those looking at the first time on such benchmarks not knowing much about the tur= bo boost issue one would definitely choose the faster one :-( I'd appreciate results of a benchmark considering no boost and with a light= sched on the scheduler (doesn't Linux have a very sophisticated scheduler dealing/scalin= g very efficient with lots of threads/cpu cores? This could also be a very interes= ting benchmark pointing to AMDs new Epyc platform comprised also from lots of cpu cores). Kind regards, oh --=20 O. Hartmann Ich widerspreche der Nutzung oder =C3=9Cbermittlung meiner Daten f=C3=BCr Werbezwecke oder f=C3=BCr die Markt- oder Meinungsforschung (=C2=A7 28 Abs.= 4 BDSG). --Sig_/rePbvxrMaFY+S1D=Uv52lqZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iLUEARMKAB0WIQQZVZMzAtwC2T/86TrS528fyFhYlAUCWdtJMAAKCRDS528fyFhY lBZzAfsEJ6NkrtoNOZsiEcmDsws74dxyg9yuio7FvGr4DzsMnzGSOtK48KDfqmDh 2oMLi0+sH3JWALlGjmmVC65Ab+ZIAgCL7Q9NaV84SwfnQVdK2olORJLEQgkVHXoA j+8dPMl7uel2aJUmSbDiRiASsRXydb6viKRnonBZpvdiwHfsmBfW =3jrZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/rePbvxrMaFY+S1D=Uv52lqZ-- From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sat Oct 14 01:50:55 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 874F0E34827; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 01:50:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ua0-x242.google.com (mail-ua0-x242.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::242]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 477F781B71; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 01:50:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ua0-x242.google.com with SMTP id s41so6448755uab.10; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:50:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3rlXma3ZwBMFSoOR5TTiOnZPidAOhB9tJ+FPyeAyXFQ=; b=fr0C/hNRNWEQW1RU6h7LD0R6uT3llP8Wy9Tpu0Oh9PdursOxT4uo1xeKtXNm/co1xx 7A0Mvu0NQBAFTNqIOW35nQNVsVj9G88fPddlT/gnXIECvBsjo2adKDGuR3oXaYVkHbjz 6sSAOLY/mCTcso8iM+4ONWgqtmUxWJSxy1HzKZjDC/DD6d7ergEYWtSfldPx8hrdULR+ DP0C4AyaXKl4KnBwMV9/wHijsg0U1vz9iluEi67kT2Pu64EJTonIp9lC06eAeARJ2ld1 H/eOdUA6syNdV0p7Y/J/l1xxXL4OO3JlxKfJBlZMtsGkBo73oSRB5PmD+x6sgt/D5wsx 7eZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3rlXma3ZwBMFSoOR5TTiOnZPidAOhB9tJ+FPyeAyXFQ=; b=edGtfLpK4991C2KLABOe+WwwUBAFaY+B2ZXtfuFlE0ubD9hF8h5K6Jy6t/sfEX2fph AJL4+uKnZOLeqpI6fNwweBgOKwfJCJma99EMPpvzqilXs1pSexysqU19qSSqU5KxD786 XIYhNZZjhSL/T/Hfmbt0wHqZ4hJYsz1Fa/TpoeDWGoi15JQwkgRZiNfSaXjwRcmJ2wK/ pZpYelVDrhqkrC7PGWfs4CVUDTGtx829DBQA62cmvdWK0nXCm5C2ao+Mw3bRtsvXHayR rVBbfYDshgYOF6T6yHRfw/F8x2Mry2fs/H1CwYuRd2OE2gb0jtkOM00Cl3aGP1YvmnkF k0Ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXUoc1D8YNL2my5Vv3h98e9jdLTNCFUW+VxxmNdWGE1d4nXI9Ox LJk0x4xuHk26VLe3OtsrcVGCYW6Lotnh7Wm+LEZgQA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QBi2etPYGXUWLktm2EaxQ5mJD4Hkqcg24ZeeF0xdLJtWzL3Jf2RgbW+lNRSOLYU9J3DGTJe4S6Vzf4SC4oxN4E= X-Received: by 10.176.75.195 with SMTP id b3mr2628042uag.51.1507945853438; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:50:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.50.129 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 18:50:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: grarpamp Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 21:50:13 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Power9 Inexpensive Development Testbed To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, info@freebsdfoundation.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 01:50:55 -0000 On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 5:59 PM, grarpamp wrote: > With Power8 aging and Power9 shipping... Consider picking up a > couple of these to support the development of getting FreeBSD going > on the bare iron without hypervisor. FreeBSD being a member already, > good support for this effort should be available from the OpenPOWER > Foundation / IBM. They seem to want to make Power9 and beyond happen > in a big way. Linux also has support for Power9. > > A barebones selfbuilt machine for the dev cluster would cost about > $3200-$3500, and/or donation could be solicited from OpenPOWER > Foundation. > > https://raptorcs.com/TALOSII/ > https://raptorcs.com/content/base/faq.html > https://github.com/open-power > https://github.com/openbmc > https://wikipedia.org/wiki/POWER9 > https://openpowerfoundation.org/ > > Just an FYI for those unfamiliar, including potential users. > > This thread could be updated to list other Power9 > hardware sources as they become known by > the FreeBSD community. Adding some more "official" links about this CPU and platform for anyone interested. Some of them may refer to Power8, which can be viewed as carrying over plus better to Power9. The Open Power Foundation / IBM full release, marketing, and public availability of Power9 seems to be set for 2018q1. So expect more vendors and so forth at that time. *** Note that this platform apparently does not have any closed source firmware / microcode or BIOS blobs. That means no Intel AMT / ME, no AMD PSP, etc. Programming documentation should be available. And seems to perform competetively on a number of fronts / tasking. *** https://www.crowdsupply.com/raptor-computing-systems/talos-secure-workstation https://www.raptorengineering.com/TALOS/op_qemu_gl.php https://www.raptorengineering.com/content/base/canary.htm https://secure.raptorcs.com/blog/08212017001.php https://social.raptorengineering.io/main/public https://www.reddit.com/user/madscientist159 https://twitter.com/RaptorEng https://twitter.com/RaptorCompSys https://www.reddit.com/user/stwcx https://wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenPOWER_Foundation https://www.ibm.com/power/operating-systems/linux https://www.ibm.com/Search/?q=power9 https://twitter.com/ibmpowerlinux http://tyan.com/campaign/OpenPOWER/ http://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/respects-your-freedom https://www.fsf.org/blogs/licensing/only-a-short-time-left-to-pre-order-the-talos-ii-pre-orders-end-september-15th You can search some third party sites for performance, news, and reviews. Search on "openpower" or "power9". https://twitter.com/search?q=power9 https://www.nextplatform.com/?s=power9 https://www.servethehome.com/?s=openpower https://www.anandtech.com/SearchResults?q=openpower http://www.storagereview.com/search/node/openpower https://hn.algolia.com/?query=power9&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story Some articles that have appeared... https://www.nextplatform.com/2016/04/06/inside-future-google-rackspace-power9-system/ https://www.nextplatform.com/2017/09/19/power9-rollout-begins-summit-sierra/ https://blog.rackspace.com/the-latest-zaius-barreleye-g2-open-compute-openpower-server https://www.enterprisetech.com/2014/07/15/open-sourced-bios-helps-power8-compete-x86/ http://www.theplatform.net/2015/03/23/inside-the-rackspace-openpower-megaserver/ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12351319 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14956257 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Linux-4.8-More-POWER9 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Power-Changes-Linux-4.12 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Raptor-Talos-2-Teaser https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Talos-2-POWER9-Pre-Order https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Talos-2-FSF-RYF-Possible FreeBSD status... https://wiki.freebsd.org/POWER8 https://www.freebsdnews.com/2015/03/04/freebsd-power8-its-alive-2/ https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=279189 https://www.freebsd.org/news/status/report-2015-01-2015-03.html#FreeBSD-on-POWER8 https://reviews.freebsd.org/search/query/oIdoWWKTe71p/ Sorry don't know which list is best, perhaps hardware@? Anyway, happy hacking :) From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sat Oct 14 02:27:02 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A2C1E365CD for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 02:27:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ua0-x236.google.com (mail-ua0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45D3583123 for ; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 02:27:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from grarpamp@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ua0-x236.google.com with SMTP id n22so6486456uaj.13 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:27:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gv+O+2FOn1rRZk/OlalI4rfOFxuMZnTYSj5Pxjg9KGg=; b=ACgprrNeEZBZDeVj6BlySGnNCagsAm0wNWtzypzAzXX1oRW0E5cfR5ONRM6DODdDQ8 9rPCTLGF6Gs6OGY6165k5hnGb2glECuc/XNA1Si03ElsENnmj5qeCByIrxgBMFHwSvDM sCvCV9TGhdxv7ZAozYyaWUZujs/gW3CQF6iJunkEWJQL7JKo+wh/WAQ42U48fp49nCgt JKnurJeX0ZiwTtdRDy5yTxWFHl3TKM9M2vaqGsc84DrBChkhHrrLtF4gCNVCrN+OtvZX 3IZrsrizLACDlZ5HxuNNhwFkx6OlFUs+5PZi3NyNWwGRpstisB/qeTHWEF+wYs9OLSGs Pelw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=gv+O+2FOn1rRZk/OlalI4rfOFxuMZnTYSj5Pxjg9KGg=; b=UW3eKEQE68Toj+DrItIUGg5D5w1WrgrYHosBJC2wGHse6H4P/GWOZqRA9+DUW3sYxY o3YM7alwkAu042FJ/rrKxixKWlXA/zxFToereOq7sTTDLvwySi9u4w1zdy9FcYmz7FjW 7CmeA5meFZpaAlj6egx8/UMRrm9pxCPuxX8mInakLXttW1cEJq+j5DyPVNLUCMRnT3mq nd7yqwXDSZYRiZcpvVuZcqpfjMg4Mr8cjZTOpI3B6rMcT3ELpGZMZ7ySbbDkA2qxwC51 3ust6AXpv6/eykWZUASgUOCmyLehdcpkUCWnaoM1hZFryHMj+eqwJ3kBEuZ1cC9tbHTS oE3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaX9fD7cinvkhPPHxdzeFAQM57ATPz1YVJb6w+A8ZiGf02DnhwtM erkrLyJr2obI24hZ32kXMNdDfgDJqHW8TxSQv/MMxA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+TYOoZgO3sk7KVe463yyA5Kophz+hhvsTMkVha51KFWGXPRDat5S2SJDvyYZGB1BdTH9Ot7DnjTNFwEH4cJwDE= X-Received: by 10.159.56.153 with SMTP id t25mr2797688uaf.14.1507948020964; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:27:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.159.50.129 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 19:26:20 -0700 (PDT) From: grarpamp Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 22:26:20 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: General Performance Review Topics [re: Xeon Running FBSD] To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 02:27:02 -0000 > To get more consistent results, you may actually want to disable turboboost in the bios, and rerun the benchmarks on ALL of the operating systems. > Wow, the difference between the FreeBSDs and Linux performance is amazing and for those looking at the first time on such benchmarks not knowing much about the turbo boost issue one would definitely choose the faster one :-( > I'd appreciate results of a benchmark considering "x"... > AMDs new Epyc platform comprised also from lots of cpu cores > You might want to try enabling turbo boost. > sysctl dev.cpu.0.freq=9999 Not on the list so I could not see if you folks were CC'ing the reviewers (since the freebsd list mbox archives fail to include the important CC lines.). They certainly should be informed of review feedback. So are reviewers going to spend time on searching, mailing, and applying all manner of specific tuning and recompiling trying to figure out (and/or fix) why performance of OS 1 sucks compared to OS 2? Alternatively, who is doing hardcore reviews of unix OS? What is the demand for that? Or are they going to take the released default boxed version of any given set of OS and put it through its paces such as any relatively newcoming user might do? And thus why should, or should not, FreeBSD just ship with freq=9999, or any other generic, obvious, faq'd, or necessary tuning by default? Are we worried about melting down somone's silicon by shiping with turbo boost enabled? About some bugs? About maintaining balance of results across workloads? Is there concern about accurate protrayal of long running performance where cpu heats up thus slowing performance down to steady state, vs short performance test runs of perhaps less than a minute that some reviewers might be using? Is there bilateral participation with reviewers on upcoming review plans, methodologies, feedback, improvements, etc? A structure / group in place within FreeBSD tasked with identifying, developing, integrating performance improvements? Thoughts. From owner-freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Sat Oct 14 03:49:45 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6679AE3A35C; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 03:49:45 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [192.108.105.60]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mail.soaustin.net", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 448E616B6; Sat, 14 Oct 2017 03:49:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from lonesome.com (bones.soaustin.net [192.108.105.22]) by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4791ABFC; Fri, 13 Oct 2017 22:49:38 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 22:49:37 -0500 From: Mark Linimon To: grarpamp Cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, info@freebsdfoundation.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Power9 Inexpensive Development Testbed Message-ID: <20171014034936.GA18066@lonesome.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 10:38:01 +0000 X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 03:49:45 -0000 A few of us FreeBSD/powerpc64 fans are watching the developments closely. mcl