From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [sctp] a6c2f79287: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -37.2% regression
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:14:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160817061405.GA5401@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_f1exO4YaPCjmBQ0MorrXB2vPMZsSSbPh=AB2-XrU3xpg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2896 bytes --]
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 01:41:04PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > The perf-profile data for the two commits are attached(for the case of
> > prsctp_enable=1, the perf-profile data doesn't get collected for the 0
> > case for some reason, I'm checking the problem now).
> >
> > The CPU gets much more idle time in the bisected commit a6c2f79287:
> >
> > 68.89% 0.70% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> > 49.32% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sys_sendmsg
> > 49.17% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __sys_sendmsg
> > 48.58% 0.22% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ___sys_sendmsg
> > 46.69% 0.06% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sock_sendmsg
> > 46.31% 0.16% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] inet_sendmsg
> > 45.90% 0.98% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_sendmsg
> > 29.66% 0.45% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_do_sm
> > 29.54% 0.23% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_startup_entry
> > 28.81% 0.68% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_cmd_interpreter.isra.24
> > 26.20% 0.00% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] start_secondary
> > 23.04% 0.09% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_inq_push
> > 23.03% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] call_cpuidle
> > 22.94% 0.00% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpuidle_enter
> > 22.60% 0.18% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpuidle_enter_state
> > 21.99% 21.99% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] intel_idle
> > ... ...
> >
> > While its immediate parent commit 826d253d57 is mostly busy working:
> >
> > 98.53% 0.83% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> > 78.13% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sys_sendmsg
> > 78.03% 0.16% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __sys_sendmsg
> > 77.08% 0.28% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ___sys_sendmsg
> > 74.44% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sock_sendmsg
> > 73.82% 0.13% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] inet_sendmsg
> > 73.34% 1.44% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_sendmsg
> > 47.52% 0.75% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_do_sm
> > 46.19% 0.90% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_cmd_interpreter.isra.24
> > 37.17% 1.43% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_outq_flush
> > 36.93% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_outq_uncork
> > 34.24% 0.15% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_inq_push
> > ... ...
> > No idle related function above 1%.
> >
> > Will the bisected commit make the idle possible?
> No, not at all. :)
>
> pls help to debug as I said in the last reply.
OK, will see how to do that.
In the meantime, I just tried to reproduce on my own desktop:
Sandybridge i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz and it reproduced:
$ cat 4.7.0-rc6-01198-ga6c2f792873a/0/netperf.json
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
752.9450000000002
]
}
$ cat 4.7.0-rc6-01197-g826d253d57b1/0/netperf.json
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
1068.5556249999997
]
}
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
lkp@01.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [sctp] a6c2f79287: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -37.2% regression
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 14:14:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160817061405.GA5401@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_f1exO4YaPCjmBQ0MorrXB2vPMZsSSbPh=AB2-XrU3xpg@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 01:41:04PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > The perf-profile data for the two commits are attached(for the case of
> > prsctp_enable=1, the perf-profile data doesn't get collected for the 0
> > case for some reason, I'm checking the problem now).
> >
> > The CPU gets much more idle time in the bisected commit a6c2f79287:
> >
> > 68.89% 0.70% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> > 49.32% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sys_sendmsg
> > 49.17% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __sys_sendmsg
> > 48.58% 0.22% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ___sys_sendmsg
> > 46.69% 0.06% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sock_sendmsg
> > 46.31% 0.16% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] inet_sendmsg
> > 45.90% 0.98% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_sendmsg
> > 29.66% 0.45% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_do_sm
> > 29.54% 0.23% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpu_startup_entry
> > 28.81% 0.68% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_cmd_interpreter.isra.24
> > 26.20% 0.00% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] start_secondary
> > 23.04% 0.09% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_inq_push
> > 23.03% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] call_cpuidle
> > 22.94% 0.00% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpuidle_enter
> > 22.60% 0.18% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] cpuidle_enter_state
> > 21.99% 21.99% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] intel_idle
> > ... ...
> >
> > While its immediate parent commit 826d253d57 is mostly busy working:
> >
> > 98.53% 0.83% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> > 78.13% 0.12% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sys_sendmsg
> > 78.03% 0.16% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __sys_sendmsg
> > 77.08% 0.28% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] ___sys_sendmsg
> > 74.44% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sock_sendmsg
> > 73.82% 0.13% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] inet_sendmsg
> > 73.34% 1.44% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_sendmsg
> > 47.52% 0.75% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_do_sm
> > 46.19% 0.90% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_cmd_interpreter.isra.24
> > 37.17% 1.43% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_outq_flush
> > 36.93% 0.08% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_outq_uncork
> > 34.24% 0.15% [kernel.kallsyms] [k] sctp_inq_push
> > ... ...
> > No idle related function above 1%.
> >
> > Will the bisected commit make the idle possible?
> No, not at all. :)
>
> pls help to debug as I said in the last reply.
OK, will see how to do that.
In the meantime, I just tried to reproduce on my own desktop:
Sandybridge i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz and it reproduced:
$ cat 4.7.0-rc6-01198-ga6c2f792873a/0/netperf.json
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
752.9450000000002
]
}
$ cat 4.7.0-rc6-01197-g826d253d57b1/0/netperf.json
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
1068.5556249999997
]
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 6:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-27 1:54 [sctp] a6c2f79287: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -37.2% regression kernel test robot
2016-07-27 1:54 ` [lkp] " kernel test robot
2016-07-28 7:01 ` Xin Long
2016-07-28 7:01 ` [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-05 3:31 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-05 3:31 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-05 11:53 ` Xin Long
2016-08-05 11:53 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-08 2:10 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-08 2:10 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 2:38 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 2:38 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:02 ` Xin Long
2016-08-16 8:02 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-16 8:30 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:30 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:51 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:51 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 9:56 ` Xin Long
2016-08-16 9:56 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:04 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 5:04 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 5:34 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:34 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:34 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 5:34 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 5:41 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:41 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 6:14 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2016-08-17 6:14 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:37 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:37 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:42 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:42 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:35 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 7:35 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 7:42 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:42 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:53 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:53 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 8:02 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 8:02 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 8:48 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 8:48 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 8:58 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 8:58 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-17 9:20 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 9:20 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 18:06 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 18:06 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-18 3:21 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-18 3:21 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-18 12:45 ` Xin Long
2016-08-18 12:45 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-08-19 5:29 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-19 5:29 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-19 7:19 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-19 7:19 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-19 7:24 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-19 7:24 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-22 21:44 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-22 21:44 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-23 9:19 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-23 9:19 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-09-30 7:05 ` Aaron Lu
2016-09-30 7:05 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-10-03 2:32 ` Xin Long
2016-10-03 2:32 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
2016-10-09 7:41 ` Aaron Lu
2016-10-09 7:41 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 18:34 ` Xin Long
2016-08-16 18:34 ` [LKP] [lkp] " Xin Long
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=20160817061405.GA5401@aaronlu.sh.intel.com \
--to=aaron.lu@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.