From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@sgi.com>
To: Yann Dupont <Yann.Dupont@univ-nantes.fr>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: kernels 3.4 slower due to allocation workqueue
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 08:45:16 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <516C046C.8080908@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <516BCACE.1040900@univ-nantes.fr>
On 04/15/13 04:39, Yann Dupont wrote:
> Hello,
> last week we received new machines (DELL R720xd) for an extension of our
> ceph cluster.
> (64 Gb ram, 2x Xeon E5-2650, PERC H710P (really LSI MEGARAID), and 12x3
> TB disks + 2SSD (not used as cachecade))
>
> I was doing test on the raid card with kernel 3.4.38 to try to find what
> I can get of this beast with RAID5, when I noticed an unusual slow
> values on compilebench. The difference is very visible on the initial
> create tests (can detail more if needed).
>
> I finally observed that ONLY 3.4 kernels exhibit that behaviour ;
> 3.3.xxx and before are OK, 3.5.xxx and later are back to good values.
>
> I bisected the problem to this commit
>
> c999a223c2f0d31c64ef7379814cea1378b2b800 is the first bad commit
> commit c999a223c2f0d31c64ef7379814cea1378b2b800
> Author: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
> Date: Thu Mar 22 05:15:07 2012 +0000
>
> xfs: introduce an allocation workqueue
>
> I understand this regression is not a bug, and probably just a corner
> case of the new code, that was certainly corrected after during 3.5
> development (didn't tried to bisect this one, maybe dave know what is
> the corrective patch ?)
>
> The problem is that 3.4 is the last long-term kernel for the moment, and
> it's unfortunate it shows this regression.
>
> Maybe a backport of the fix (if this backport is possible AND not very
> intrusive) could be a good idea ?
>
> Cheers,
>
Here are the allocation worker changes.
The biggest performance commit should be aa292847, which limits the
callers to the worker.
commit 3b876c8f2a361ceeed3fed894980c69066f903a0
Author: Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@oracle.com>
Date: Thu Jun 7 15:44:32 2012 +0800
xfs: fix debug_object WARN at xfs_alloc_vextent()
commit aa292847b9fc6e187547110de833a7d3131bbddf
Author: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Jul 12 07:40:43 2012 +1000
xfs: don't defer metadata allocation to the workqueue
commit 2455881c0b52f87be539c4c7deab1afff4d8a560
Author: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Oct 5 11:06:58 2012 +1000
xfs: introduce XFS_BMAPI_STACK_SWITCH
commit e04426b9202bccd4cfcbc70b2fa2aeca1c86d8f5
Author: Dave Chinner <dchinner@redhat.com>
Date: Fri Oct 5 11:06:59 2012 +1000
xfs: move allocation stack switch up to xfs_bmapi_allocate
commit 9e96fe6df44425b69ed89f6ac20352cec1f127d7
Author: Brian Foster <bfoster@redhat.com>
Date: Thu Jan 17 13:11:29 2013 -0500
xfs: pull up stack_switch check into xfs_bmapi_write
The last 3 patches address an AGF buffer hang with the allocation worker.
--Mark.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-15 13:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-15 9:39 kernels 3.4 slower due to allocation workqueue Yann Dupont
2013-04-15 13:45 ` Mark Tinguely [this message]
2013-04-16 7:24 ` Yann Dupont
2013-04-16 8:37 ` Yann Dupont
2013-04-16 13:26 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-04-17 13:44 ` Yann Dupont
2013-04-17 14:11 ` Mark Tinguely
2013-04-17 14:35 ` Yann Dupont
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=516C046C.8080908@sgi.com \
--to=tinguely@sgi.com \
--cc=Yann.Dupont@univ-nantes.fr \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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.