All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp-robot] [mm] e27be240df: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -27.2% regression
Date: Wed, 09 May 2018 10:32:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180509023211.GB10016@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180508172640.GB24175@cmpxchg.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1749 bytes --]

On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:26:40PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:34:51PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > FYI, we noticed a -27.2% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
> > 
> > 
> > commit: e27be240df53f1a20c659168e722b5d9f16cc7f4 ("mm: memcg: make sure memory.events is uptodate when waking pollers")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > 
> > in testcase: will-it-scale
> > on test machine: 72 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz with 128G memory
> > with following parameters:
> > 
> > 	nr_task: 100%
> > 	mode: process
> > 	test: page_fault3
> > 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> > 
> > test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> > test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
> 
> This is surprising. Do you run these tests in a memory cgroup with a
> limit set? Can you dump that cgroup's memory.events after the run?

There is no cgroup related setup so yes, this is surprising.
But the result is quite stable, I have just confirmed on another
Haswell-EP machine.

perf shows increased cycles spent for lock_page_memcg and
unlock_page_memcg, maybe this can shed some light. Full profile for this
commit and its parent are attached.

I have also attached dmesg for both commits in case they are useful,
please feel free to let me know if you need any other information. We
also collected a ton of other information during the run like
/proc/vmstat, /proc/meminfo, /proc/interrupt etc.

[-- Attachment #2: a38c015f3156-perf_profile.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 7220 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: e27be240df53-perf_profile.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 6877 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #4: a38c015f3156-dmesg.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 22428 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #5: e27be240df53-dmesg.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 21884 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
	lkp@01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp-robot] [mm] e27be240df: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -27.2% regression
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 10:32:12 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180509023211.GB10016@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180508172640.GB24175@cmpxchg.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1712 bytes --]

On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:26:40PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 01:34:51PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > FYI, we noticed a -27.2% regression of will-it-scale.per_process_ops due to commit:
> > 
> > 
> > commit: e27be240df53f1a20c659168e722b5d9f16cc7f4 ("mm: memcg: make sure memory.events is uptodate when waking pollers")
> > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > 
> > in testcase: will-it-scale
> > on test machine: 72 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz with 128G memory
> > with following parameters:
> > 
> > 	nr_task: 100%
> > 	mode: process
> > 	test: page_fault3
> > 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> > 
> > test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> > test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
> 
> This is surprising. Do you run these tests in a memory cgroup with a
> limit set? Can you dump that cgroup's memory.events after the run?

There is no cgroup related setup so yes, this is surprising.
But the result is quite stable, I have just confirmed on another
Haswell-EP machine.

perf shows increased cycles spent for lock_page_memcg and
unlock_page_memcg, maybe this can shed some light. Full profile for this
commit and its parent are attached.

I have also attached dmesg for both commits in case they are useful,
please feel free to let me know if you need any other information. We
also collected a ton of other information during the run like
/proc/vmstat, /proc/meminfo, /proc/interrupt etc.

[-- Attachment #2: a38c015f3156-perf_profile.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 7220 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #3: e27be240df53-perf_profile.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 6877 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #4: a38c015f3156-dmesg.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 22428 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #5: e27be240df53-dmesg.xz --]
[-- Type: application/x-xz, Size: 21884 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-09  2:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-08  5:34 [lkp-robot] [mm] e27be240df: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -27.2% regression kernel test robot
2018-05-08  5:34 ` kernel test robot
2018-05-08 17:26 ` Johannes Weiner
2018-05-08 17:26   ` Johannes Weiner
2018-05-09  2:32   ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2018-05-09  2:32     ` [LKP] " Aaron Lu
2018-05-09 15:02     ` Aaron Lu
2018-05-09 15:02       ` [LKP] " Aaron Lu
2018-05-28  8:52   ` Aaron Lu
2018-05-28  8:52     ` [LKP] " Aaron Lu
2018-05-29  8:48     ` Michal Hocko
2018-05-29  8:48       ` [LKP] " Michal Hocko
2018-05-30  8:27       ` Aaron Lu
2018-05-30  8:27         ` [LKP] " Aaron Lu
2018-06-01  7:11         ` [RFC PATCH] mem_cgroup: make sure moving_account, move_lock_task and stat_cpu in the same cacheline Aaron Lu
2018-06-01  7:11           ` Aaron Lu

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=20180509023211.GB10016@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.