From: Ye Xiaolong <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [irq/affinity] 13c024422c: fsmark.files_per_sec -4.3% regression
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 09:06:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170413010604.GH31394@yexl-desktop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <B58D82457FDA0744A320A2FC5AC253B93D8EC247@fmsmsx104.amr.corp.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9608 bytes --]
On 04/12, Busch, Keith wrote:
>Hi Xiaolong,
>
>Thanks for letting me know of the regression. This change wasn't supposed to affect anything outside the unbalanced numa case, so if it's indeed the culprit, I'll need to fix that.
>
>From the machine that demonstrates the regression, could you send me 'lscpu'? And the output from the following commands, both with and without the patch applied?
Okay, when should I run the `lscpu` and below cmds, before, after or during the test?
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
># cat /proc/interrupts
># for i in $(grep nvme0q /proc/interrupts | cut -d":" -f1 | sed "s/ //g"); do echo "irq $i smp affinity: `cat /proc/irq/$i/smp_affinity`"; done
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: lkp-robot-request(a)eclists.intel.com [mailto:lkp-robot-request(a)eclists.intel.com] On Behalf Of Ye, Xiaolong
>Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2017 7:33 PM
>To: Busch, Keith <keith.busch@intel.com>
>Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>; linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org; linux-nvme(a)lists.infradead.org; Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>; lkp(a)01.org
>Subject: [lkp-robot] [irq/affinity] 13c024422c: fsmark.files_per_sec -4.3% regression
>
>
>Greeting,
>
>FYI, we noticed a -4.3% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec due to commit:
>
>
>commit: 13c024422cbb6dcc513667be9a2613b0f0de781a ("irq/affinity: Assign all CPUs a vector")
>url: https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Keith-Busch/irq-affinity-Assign-all-CPUs-a-vector/20170401-035036
>
>
>in testcase: fsmark
>on test machine: 72 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz with 128G memory
>with following parameters:
>
> iterations: 8
> disk: 1SSD
> nr_threads: 4
> fs: btrfs
> filesize: 9B
> test_size: 16G
> sync_method: fsyncBeforeClose
> nr_directories: 16d
> nr_files_per_directory: 256fpd
> cpufreq_governor: performance
>
>test-description: The fsmark is a file system benchmark to test synchronous write workloads, for example, mail servers workload.
>test-url: https://sourceforge.net/projects/fsmark/
>
>
>Details are as below:
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>
>
>To reproduce:
>
> git clone https://github.com/01org/lkp-tests.git
> cd lkp-tests
> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
> bin/lkp run job.yaml
>
>testcase/path_params/tbox_group/run: fsmark/8-1SSD-4-btrfs-9B-16G-fsyncBeforeClose-16d-256fpd-performance/lkp-hsw-ep4
>
>45e5202213ae6541 13c024422cbb6dcc513667be9a
>---------------- --------------------------
> %stddev change %stddev
> \ | \
> 13888 -4% 13293 fsmark.files_per_sec
> 302 4% 315 fsmark.time.elapsed_time
> 302 4% 315 fsmark.time.elapsed_time.max
> 2.452e+08 3% 2.528e+08 fsmark.time.file_system_outputs
> 20265209 19926430 fsmark.time.voluntary_context_switches
> 206 -4% 198 fsmark.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
> 707811 -65% 246894 fsmark.time.involuntary_context_switches
> 383249 ± 13% -36% 246054 interrupts.CAL:Function_call_interrupts
> 149418 -5% 141286 vmstat.system.cs
> 190 -7% 178 turbostat.Avg_MHz
> 6.25 -5% 5.93 turbostat.%Busy
> 8994 ± 3% 199% 26910 ± 13% perf-stat.cpu-migrations
> 45475990 44940538 perf-stat.context-switches
> 0.42 12% 0.48 perf-stat.dTLB-load-miss-rate%
> 0.09 10% 0.09 perf-stat.dTLB-store-miss-rate%
> 2.162e+08 7% 2.324e+08 perf-stat.dTLB-store-misses
> 674521 4% 703995 perf-stat.page-faults
> 674521 4% 703995 perf-stat.minor-faults
> 1.46 4% 1.52 perf-stat.branch-miss-rate%
> 1.445e+09 3% 1.494e+09 perf-stat.iTLB-loads
>
>
>
> fsmark.time.elapsed_time
>
> 400 ++--------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | O |
> 350 ++ |
> 300 O+O.O.O O.O.O.*.O..O.O.O O O.O.O.O O O.O.O.O.O.O.O.*.. .*.*.*.*. .*.*.*
> | *.* * : * : * * |
> 250 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 200 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 150 ++ : : : : |
> 100 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 50 ++ : : |
> | : : |
> 0 ++-----------------------*---------*----------------------------------+
>
>
> fsmark.time.elapsed_time.max
>
> 400 ++--------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | O |
> 350 ++ |
> 300 O+O.O.O O.O.O.*.O..O.O.O O O.O.O.O O O.O.O.O.O.O.O.*.. .*.*.*.*. .*.*.*
> | *.* * : * : * * |
> 250 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 200 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 150 ++ : : : : |
> 100 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 50 ++ : : |
> | : : |
> 0 ++-----------------------*---------*----------------------------------+
>
>
> fsmark.time.involuntary_context_switches
>
> 800000 ++-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> *.*.*.*.*. .*. .* .*.* .*. .*. .*. .*
> 700000 ++ * *.*.*.* : *.* : *.* *.*.*.*.*.*.*.* * *.* |
> | : : : : |
> 600000 ++ : : : : |
> 500000 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 400000 ++ : : : : |
> | O : : : : |
> 300000 ++ : : :: |
> 200000 O+O O O O O O O O O O:O:O O O O:OO O O O O O O |
> | :: : |
> 100000 ++ : : |
> | : : |
> 0 ++----------------------*---------*--------------------------------+
>
>
> fsmark.files_per_sec
>
> 16000 ++------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | |
> 14000 O+*.O.O.O.O.O.*.O.O.O.O O O.O.O.O O O.O.O.O.O.O.O.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*.*
> 12000 ++O : : : : |
> | O : : : : |
> 10000 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 8000 ++ : : : : |
> | : : : : |
> 6000 ++ : : : : |
> 4000 ++ : : : : |
> | :: :: |
> 2000 ++ : : |
> | : : |
> 0 ++----------------------*---------*---------------------------------+
>
> [*] bisect-good sample
> [O] bisect-bad sample
>
>
>Disclaimer:
>Results have been estimated based on internal Intel analysis and are provided
>for informational purposes only. Any difference in system hardware or software
>design or configuration may affect actual performance.
>
>
>Thanks,
>Xiaolong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-13 1:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-28 23:21 [PATCH] irq/affinity: Assign all CPUs a vector Keith Busch
2017-03-28 23:21 ` Keith Busch
2017-03-29 17:15 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-03-29 17:15 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-03-29 17:54 ` Keith Busch
2017-03-29 17:54 ` Keith Busch
2017-03-29 17:50 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-03-29 17:50 ` Sagi Grimberg
2017-03-30 8:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 8:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2017-03-30 17:12 ` Keith Busch
2017-03-30 17:12 ` Keith Busch
2017-04-12 1:33 ` [lkp-robot] [irq/affinity] 13c024422c: fsmark.files_per_sec -4.3% regression kernel test robot
2017-04-12 1:33 ` kernel test robot
2017-04-12 1:33 ` kernel test robot
2017-04-12 13:52 ` Busch, Keith
2017-04-13 1:06 ` Ye Xiaolong [this message]
2017-04-13 14:24 ` Keith Busch
2017-04-13 17:14 ` Busch, Keith
2017-04-14 0:49 ` Ye Xiaolong
2017-04-12 15:02 ` Keith Busch
2017-04-12 15:02 ` Keith Busch
2017-04-12 15:02 ` Keith Busch
2017-03-31 10:59 ` [PATCH] irq/affinity: Assign all CPUs a vector Thomas Gleixner
2017-03-31 10:59 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=20170413010604.GH31394@yexl-desktop \
--to=xiaolong.ye@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.