All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: lkp@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [sched/numa] 0fb3978b0a: stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_sec -18.9% regression
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2022 11:24:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309112404.GH15701@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tuc7fp9k.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2567 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 05:28:55PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Hi, All,
> 
> "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi, Oliver,
> >
> > Thanks for report.
> >
> > I still cannot connect the regression with the patch yet.  To double
> > check, I have run test again with "sched_verbose" kernel command line,
> > and verified that the sched_domain isn't changed at all with the patch.
> >
> > kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> writes:
> >>       0.11   6%      +0.1        0.16   4%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.update_rq_clock
> >>       0.00            +0.1        0.06   6%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.memset_erms
> >>       0.00            +0.1        0.07   5%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.get_pid_task
> >>       0.06   7%      +0.1        0.17   6%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.select_task_rq_fair
> >>       0.54   5%      +0.1        0.68        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_return
> >>       4.26            +1.1        5.33        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.common_perm_cond
> >>      15.45            +4.9       20.37        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_or_lock
> >>      20.12            +6.7       26.82        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_get_not_dead
> >
> > From the perf-profile above, the most visible change is more cycles in
> > lockref_get_not_dead(), which will loop with cmpxchg on
> > dentry->d_lockref.  So this appears to be related to the memory layout.
> > I will try to debug that.
> >
> > Because stress-ng is a weird "benchmark" although it's a very good
> > functionality test, and I cannot connect the patch with the test case
> > and performance metrics collected.  I think this regression should be a
> > low priority one which shouldn't prevent the merging etc.  But I will
> > continue to investigate the regression to try to root cause it.
> 
> Done more investigation for this.  It turns out the sched_domain has
> been changed after commit 0fb3978b0a, although it's not shown in default
> sched_verbose output.  sd->imb_numa_nr of level "NUMA" has been changed
> from 24 to 12 after the commit.  So the following debug patch restore
> the performance.
> 

If Ice Lake has multiple last level caches per socket (I didn't check)
then the sd->imb_numa_nr would have changed. I didn't dig into what
stress-ng fstat is doing as it's a stress test more than a performance
test but given that the number of threads is 10% of the total, it's
possible that the workload is being split across nodes differently.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	x86@kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com,
	fengwei.yin@intel.com, aubrey.li@linux.intel.com,
	yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [sched/numa]  0fb3978b0a: stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_sec -18.9% regression
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 11:24:04 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309112404.GH15701@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tuc7fp9k.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>

On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 05:28:55PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Hi, All,
> 
> "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> writes:
> 
> > Hi, Oliver,
> >
> > Thanks for report.
> >
> > I still cannot connect the regression with the patch yet.  To double
> > check, I have run test again with "sched_verbose" kernel command line,
> > and verified that the sched_domain isn't changed at all with the patch.
> >
> > kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> writes:
> >>       0.11   6%      +0.1        0.16   4%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.update_rq_clock
> >>       0.00            +0.1        0.06   6%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.memset_erms
> >>       0.00            +0.1        0.07   5%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.get_pid_task
> >>       0.06   7%      +0.1        0.17   6%  perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.select_task_rq_fair
> >>       0.54   5%      +0.1        0.68        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_return
> >>       4.26            +1.1        5.33        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.common_perm_cond
> >>      15.45            +4.9       20.37        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_or_lock
> >>      20.12            +6.7       26.82        perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_get_not_dead
> >
> > From the perf-profile above, the most visible change is more cycles in
> > lockref_get_not_dead(), which will loop with cmpxchg on
> > dentry->d_lockref.  So this appears to be related to the memory layout.
> > I will try to debug that.
> >
> > Because stress-ng is a weird "benchmark" although it's a very good
> > functionality test, and I cannot connect the patch with the test case
> > and performance metrics collected.  I think this regression should be a
> > low priority one which shouldn't prevent the merging etc.  But I will
> > continue to investigate the regression to try to root cause it.
> 
> Done more investigation for this.  It turns out the sched_domain has
> been changed after commit 0fb3978b0a, although it's not shown in default
> sched_verbose output.  sd->imb_numa_nr of level "NUMA" has been changed
> from 24 to 12 after the commit.  So the following debug patch restore
> the performance.
> 

If Ice Lake has multiple last level caches per socket (I didn't check)
then the sd->imb_numa_nr would have changed. I didn't dig into what
stress-ng fstat is doing as it's a stress test more than a performance
test but given that the number of threads is 10% of the total, it's
possible that the workload is being split across nodes differently.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-09 11:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-02 14:02 [sched/numa] 0fb3978b0a: stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_sec -18.9% regression kernel test robot
2022-03-02 14:02 ` kernel test robot
2022-03-03  8:43 ` Huang, Ying
2022-03-03  8:43   ` Huang, Ying
2022-03-09  9:28   ` Huang, Ying
2022-03-09  9:28     ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2022-03-09 11:24     ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2022-03-09 11:24       ` Mel Gorman

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=20220309112404.GH15701@techsingularity.net \
    --to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
    --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.