From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: performance changes on c9dc4c65: 9.8% fsmark.files_per_sec
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:38:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150423013801.GP8084@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8535 bytes --]
FYI, we found performance increasement, which is expected as commit patch says,
on `fsmark.files_per_sec' by c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0:
> commit c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0
> Author: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
> AuthorDate: Sat Apr 4 17:14:42 2015 -0700
> Commit: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
> CommitDate: Fri Apr 10 14:07:11 2015 -0700
>
> Btrfs: two stage dirty block group writeout
4c6d1d85ad89fd8e32dc9204b7f944854399bda9 c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0
---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
run time(m) metric_value ±stddev run time(m) metric_value ±stddev change testbox/benchmark/testcase-params
--- ------ ---------------------------- --- ------ ---------------------------- -------- ------------------------------
3 7.3 |35.267| ±0.5 5 6.6 |38.740| ±1.6 9.8% ivb44/fsmark/1x-1t-1HDD-btrfs-4M-60G-NoSync
NOTE: here are some more explanation about those test parameters for you to
know what the testcase does better:
1x: where 'x' means iterations or loop, corresponding to the 'L' option of fsmark
1t, 64t: where 't' means thread
4M: means the single file size, corresponding to the '-s' option of fsmark
60G: means the total test size
And FYI, here are more changes by the same commit:
4c6d1d85ad89fd8e c9dc4c6578502c208570534737
---------------- --------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev
\ | \
9864 ± 2% +156.9% 25345 ± 4% fsmark.time.voluntary_context_switches
9 ± 0% +17.8% 10 ± 4% fsmark.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
462211 ± 1% +16.8% 539707 ± 0% fsmark.app_overhead
35.27 ± 0% +9.8% 38.74 ± 1% fsmark.files_per_sec
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% fsmark.time.elapsed_time.max
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% fsmark.time.elapsed_time
5.20 ± 2% -70.3% 1.54 ± 6% turbostat.Pkg%pc6
2447873 ± 42% -67.9% 785086 ± 33% numa-numastat.node1.numa_hit
2413662 ± 43% -68.1% 771115 ± 31% numa-numastat.node1.local_node
9864 ± 2% +156.9% 25345 ± 4% time.voluntary_context_switches
187680 ± 10% +126.8% 425676 ± 7% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_dirty
747361 ± 9% +127.8% 1702809 ± 7% numa-meminfo.node1.Dirty
1787510 ± 1% +117.0% 3878984 ± 2% meminfo.Dirty
446861 ± 1% +117.0% 969472 ± 2% proc-vmstat.nr_dirty
1655962 ± 37% -59.3% 673988 ± 29% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_local
1036191 ± 8% +110.3% 2179311 ± 3% numa-meminfo.node0.Dirty
259069 ± 8% +110.3% 544783 ± 3% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_dirty
1687987 ± 37% -58.6% 698626 ± 29% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_hit
1 ± 0% +100.0% 2 ± 0% vmstat.procs.b
0.02 ± 0% +100.0% 0.04 ± 22% turbostat.CPU%c3
6.03 ± 1% +76.9% 10.67 ± 1% turbostat.CPU%c1
5.189e+08 ± 0% +72.6% 8.956e+08 ± 1% cpuidle.C1-IVT.time
2646692 ± 7% +75.0% 4630890 ± 23% cpuidle.C3-IVT.time
5301 ± 6% -31.7% 3620 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_ordered_extent.active_objs
10549 ± 16% -30.3% 7349 ± 12% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_slab_reclaimable
5353 ± 6% -31.4% 3670 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_ordered_extent.num_objs
42169 ± 16% -30.3% 29397 ± 12% numa-meminfo.node1.SReclaimable
1619825 ± 22% +39.4% 2258188 ± 4% proc-vmstat.pgfree
4611 ± 7% -28.0% 3318 ± 1% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_ref_head.num_objs
4471 ± 8% -27.0% 3264 ± 2% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_ref_head.active_objs
67.93 ± 1% -24.7% 51.15 ± 4% turbostat.Pkg%pc2
2332975 ± 21% +45.6% 3396446 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_other
2300949 ± 22% +46.5% 3371807 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_miss
2300941 ± 22% +46.5% 3371793 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node0.numa_foreign
2952 ± 8% -23.3% 2263 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_data_ref.num_objs
2570716 ± 3% +25.7% 3230157 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node1.Writeback
642367 ± 3% +25.7% 807533 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_writeback
95408 ± 13% -17.3% 78910 ± 6% numa-meminfo.node1.Slab
2803 ± 7% -21.1% 2210 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_data_ref.active_objs
240 ± 9% +23.1% 295 ± 16% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_page_table_pages
4626942 ± 19% +49.6% 6924087 ± 22% cpuidle.C1E-IVT.time
5585235 ± 0% +25.5% 7011242 ± 0% meminfo.Writeback
1396232 ± 0% +25.5% 1752892 ± 0% proc-vmstat.nr_writeback
962 ± 9% +23.0% 1184 ± 16% numa-meminfo.node0.PageTables
9 ± 0% +17.8% 10 ± 4% time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
754027 ± 2% +25.2% 944312 ± 1% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_writeback
3018674 ± 2% +25.1% 3777338 ± 1% numa-meminfo.node0.Writeback
23509 ± 1% -16.9% 19530 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.active_objs
2972 ± 1% +21.4% 3607 ± 0% proc-vmstat.nr_alloc_batch
13956 ± 4% -15.6% 11773 ± 8% slabinfo.kmalloc-192.active_objs
743 ± 1% -16.0% 624 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.active_slabs
743 ± 1% -16.0% 624 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.num_slabs
23790 ± 1% -16.0% 19983 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.num_objs
68983 ± 2% +19.1% 82190 ± 4% softirqs.RCU
222 ± 11% +47.0% 326 ± 25% cpuidle.POLL.usage
14177 ± 0% +17.8% 16702 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.num_objs
14045 ± 0% +18.0% 16568 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.active_objs
885 ± 0% +17.8% 1043 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.num_slabs
885 ± 0% +17.8% 1043 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.active_slabs
14025 ± 4% -13.3% 12157 ± 7% slabinfo.kmalloc-192.num_objs
8287205 ± 10% +16.0% 9611684 ± 0% numa-numastat.node0.numa_hit
8276795 ± 10% +15.9% 9592682 ± 0% numa-numastat.node0.local_node
2615463 ± 5% -9.6% 2365256 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_written
1814 ± 5% -12.7% 1584 ± 11% numa-meminfo.node1.PageTables
453 ± 5% -12.6% 396 ± 11% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_page_table_pages
105943 ± 6% +13.6% 120352 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node0.SReclaimable
26492 ± 6% +13.6% 30086 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_slab_reclaimable
0.41 ± 1% +17.1% 0.48 ± 4% time.user_time
2155 ± 4% -11.1% 1916 ± 5% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_tree_ref.active_objs
2.028e+10 ± 0% -11.1% 1.803e+10 ± 1% cpuidle.C6-IVT.time
2155 ± 4% -10.8% 1922 ± 5% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_tree_ref.num_objs
1202 ± 4% -11.2% 1067 ± 9% slabinfo.btrfs_trans_handle.num_objs
1202 ± 4% -11.2% 1067 ± 9% slabinfo.btrfs_trans_handle.active_objs
192641 ± 5% +9.8% 211569 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node0.Slab
268137 ± 0% +12.2% 300911 ± 2% cpuidle.C6-IVT.usage
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% time.elapsed_time
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% time.elapsed_time.max
21057 ± 0% -9.0% 19165 ± 1% uptime.idle
29.89 ± 0% +37.2% 41.01 ± 3% turbostat.CorWatt
59.95 ± 0% +19.6% 71.69 ± 2% turbostat.PkgWatt
18873 ± 0% +14.9% 21692 ± 1% vmstat.system.cs
21 ± 2% +8.8% 23 ± 3% turbostat.Avg_MHz
135 ± 0% +9.1% 147 ± 0% iostat.sda.avgqu-sz
0.69 ± 2% +7.2% 0.74 ± 3% turbostat.%Busy
7478 ± 0% +5.1% 7861 ± 0% iostat.sda.await
7478 ± 0% +5.1% 7861 ± 0% iostat.sda.w_await
239 ± 0% +3.6% 247 ± 0% iostat.sda.wrqm/s
3.54 ± 0% +3.9% 3.68 ± 0% turbostat.RAMWatt
129619 ± 0% +3.2% 133743 ± 0% vmstat.io.bo
128667 ± 0% +1.9% 131056 ± 0% iostat.sda.wkB/s
--yliu
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
Cc: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
lkp@01.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: performance changes on c9dc4c65: 9.8% fsmark.files_per_sec
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:38:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150423013801.GP8084@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> (raw)
FYI, we found performance increasement, which is expected as commit patch says,
on `fsmark.files_per_sec' by c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0:
> commit c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0
> Author: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
> AuthorDate: Sat Apr 4 17:14:42 2015 -0700
> Commit: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>
> CommitDate: Fri Apr 10 14:07:11 2015 -0700
>
> Btrfs: two stage dirty block group writeout
4c6d1d85ad89fd8e32dc9204b7f944854399bda9 c9dc4c6578502c2085705347375b82089aad18d0
---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------
run time(m) metric_value ±stddev run time(m) metric_value ±stddev change testbox/benchmark/testcase-params
--- ------ ---------------------------- --- ------ ---------------------------- -------- ------------------------------
3 7.3 |35.267| ±0.5 5 6.6 |38.740| ±1.6 9.8% ivb44/fsmark/1x-1t-1HDD-btrfs-4M-60G-NoSync
NOTE: here are some more explanation about those test parameters for you to
know what the testcase does better:
1x: where 'x' means iterations or loop, corresponding to the 'L' option of fsmark
1t, 64t: where 't' means thread
4M: means the single file size, corresponding to the '-s' option of fsmark
60G: means the total test size
And FYI, here are more changes by the same commit:
4c6d1d85ad89fd8e c9dc4c6578502c208570534737
---------------- --------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev
\ | \
9864 ± 2% +156.9% 25345 ± 4% fsmark.time.voluntary_context_switches
9 ± 0% +17.8% 10 ± 4% fsmark.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
462211 ± 1% +16.8% 539707 ± 0% fsmark.app_overhead
35.27 ± 0% +9.8% 38.74 ± 1% fsmark.files_per_sec
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% fsmark.time.elapsed_time.max
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% fsmark.time.elapsed_time
5.20 ± 2% -70.3% 1.54 ± 6% turbostat.Pkg%pc6
2447873 ± 42% -67.9% 785086 ± 33% numa-numastat.node1.numa_hit
2413662 ± 43% -68.1% 771115 ± 31% numa-numastat.node1.local_node
9864 ± 2% +156.9% 25345 ± 4% time.voluntary_context_switches
187680 ± 10% +126.8% 425676 ± 7% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_dirty
747361 ± 9% +127.8% 1702809 ± 7% numa-meminfo.node1.Dirty
1787510 ± 1% +117.0% 3878984 ± 2% meminfo.Dirty
446861 ± 1% +117.0% 969472 ± 2% proc-vmstat.nr_dirty
1655962 ± 37% -59.3% 673988 ± 29% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_local
1036191 ± 8% +110.3% 2179311 ± 3% numa-meminfo.node0.Dirty
259069 ± 8% +110.3% 544783 ± 3% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_dirty
1687987 ± 37% -58.6% 698626 ± 29% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_hit
1 ± 0% +100.0% 2 ± 0% vmstat.procs.b
0.02 ± 0% +100.0% 0.04 ± 22% turbostat.CPU%c3
6.03 ± 1% +76.9% 10.67 ± 1% turbostat.CPU%c1
5.189e+08 ± 0% +72.6% 8.956e+08 ± 1% cpuidle.C1-IVT.time
2646692 ± 7% +75.0% 4630890 ± 23% cpuidle.C3-IVT.time
5301 ± 6% -31.7% 3620 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_ordered_extent.active_objs
10549 ± 16% -30.3% 7349 ± 12% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_slab_reclaimable
5353 ± 6% -31.4% 3670 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_ordered_extent.num_objs
42169 ± 16% -30.3% 29397 ± 12% numa-meminfo.node1.SReclaimable
1619825 ± 22% +39.4% 2258188 ± 4% proc-vmstat.pgfree
4611 ± 7% -28.0% 3318 ± 1% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_ref_head.num_objs
4471 ± 8% -27.0% 3264 ± 2% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_ref_head.active_objs
67.93 ± 1% -24.7% 51.15 ± 4% turbostat.Pkg%pc2
2332975 ± 21% +45.6% 3396446 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_other
2300949 ± 22% +46.5% 3371807 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node1.numa_miss
2300941 ± 22% +46.5% 3371793 ± 4% numa-vmstat.node0.numa_foreign
2952 ± 8% -23.3% 2263 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_data_ref.num_objs
2570716 ± 3% +25.7% 3230157 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node1.Writeback
642367 ± 3% +25.7% 807533 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_writeback
95408 ± 13% -17.3% 78910 ± 6% numa-meminfo.node1.Slab
2803 ± 7% -21.1% 2210 ± 3% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_data_ref.active_objs
240 ± 9% +23.1% 295 ± 16% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_page_table_pages
4626942 ± 19% +49.6% 6924087 ± 22% cpuidle.C1E-IVT.time
5585235 ± 0% +25.5% 7011242 ± 0% meminfo.Writeback
1396232 ± 0% +25.5% 1752892 ± 0% proc-vmstat.nr_writeback
962 ± 9% +23.0% 1184 ± 16% numa-meminfo.node0.PageTables
9 ± 0% +17.8% 10 ± 4% time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
754027 ± 2% +25.2% 944312 ± 1% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_writeback
3018674 ± 2% +25.1% 3777338 ± 1% numa-meminfo.node0.Writeback
23509 ± 1% -16.9% 19530 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.active_objs
2972 ± 1% +21.4% 3607 ± 0% proc-vmstat.nr_alloc_batch
13956 ± 4% -15.6% 11773 ± 8% slabinfo.kmalloc-192.active_objs
743 ± 1% -16.0% 624 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.active_slabs
743 ± 1% -16.0% 624 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.num_slabs
23790 ± 1% -16.0% 19983 ± 0% slabinfo.kmalloc-1024.num_objs
68983 ± 2% +19.1% 82190 ± 4% softirqs.RCU
222 ± 11% +47.0% 326 ± 25% cpuidle.POLL.usage
14177 ± 0% +17.8% 16702 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.num_objs
14045 ± 0% +18.0% 16568 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.active_objs
885 ± 0% +17.8% 1043 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.num_slabs
885 ± 0% +17.8% 1043 ± 1% slabinfo.kmalloc-2048.active_slabs
14025 ± 4% -13.3% 12157 ± 7% slabinfo.kmalloc-192.num_objs
8287205 ± 10% +16.0% 9611684 ± 0% numa-numastat.node0.numa_hit
8276795 ± 10% +15.9% 9592682 ± 0% numa-numastat.node0.local_node
2615463 ± 5% -9.6% 2365256 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_written
1814 ± 5% -12.7% 1584 ± 11% numa-meminfo.node1.PageTables
453 ± 5% -12.6% 396 ± 11% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_page_table_pages
105943 ± 6% +13.6% 120352 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node0.SReclaimable
26492 ± 6% +13.6% 30086 ± 2% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_slab_reclaimable
0.41 ± 1% +17.1% 0.48 ± 4% time.user_time
2155 ± 4% -11.1% 1916 ± 5% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_tree_ref.active_objs
2.028e+10 ± 0% -11.1% 1.803e+10 ± 1% cpuidle.C6-IVT.time
2155 ± 4% -10.8% 1922 ± 5% slabinfo.btrfs_delayed_tree_ref.num_objs
1202 ± 4% -11.2% 1067 ± 9% slabinfo.btrfs_trans_handle.num_objs
1202 ± 4% -11.2% 1067 ± 9% slabinfo.btrfs_trans_handle.active_objs
192641 ± 5% +9.8% 211569 ± 2% numa-meminfo.node0.Slab
268137 ± 0% +12.2% 300911 ± 2% cpuidle.C6-IVT.usage
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% time.elapsed_time
435 ± 0% -9.0% 396 ± 1% time.elapsed_time.max
21057 ± 0% -9.0% 19165 ± 1% uptime.idle
29.89 ± 0% +37.2% 41.01 ± 3% turbostat.CorWatt
59.95 ± 0% +19.6% 71.69 ± 2% turbostat.PkgWatt
18873 ± 0% +14.9% 21692 ± 1% vmstat.system.cs
21 ± 2% +8.8% 23 ± 3% turbostat.Avg_MHz
135 ± 0% +9.1% 147 ± 0% iostat.sda.avgqu-sz
0.69 ± 2% +7.2% 0.74 ± 3% turbostat.%Busy
7478 ± 0% +5.1% 7861 ± 0% iostat.sda.await
7478 ± 0% +5.1% 7861 ± 0% iostat.sda.w_await
239 ± 0% +3.6% 247 ± 0% iostat.sda.wrqm/s
3.54 ± 0% +3.9% 3.68 ± 0% turbostat.RAMWatt
129619 ± 0% +3.2% 133743 ± 0% vmstat.io.bo
128667 ± 0% +1.9% 131056 ± 0% iostat.sda.wkB/s
--yliu
next reply other threads:[~2015-04-23 1:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-23 1:38 Yuanhan Liu [this message]
2015-04-23 1:38 ` performance changes on c9dc4c65: 9.8% fsmark.files_per_sec Yuanhan Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150423013801.GP8084@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com \
--to=yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.