public inbox for linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wang Yugui <wangyugui@e16-tech.com>
To: cluster-devel@redhat.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: gfs2 write bandwidth regression on 6.4-rc3 compareto 5.15.y
Date: Sun, 28 May 2023 23:53:15 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230528235314.7852.409509F4@e16-tech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230523085929.614A.409509F4@e16-tech.com>

Hi,

> Hi,
> 
> gfs2 write bandwidth regression on 6.4-rc3 compare to 5.15.y.
> 
> we added  linux-xfs@ and linux-fsdevel@ because some related problem[1]
> and related patches[2].
> 
> we compared 6.4-rc3(rather than 6.1.y) to 5.15.y becasue some related patches[2]
> work only for 6.4 now.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20230508172406.1CF3.409509F4@e16-tech.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-xfs/20230520163603.1794256-1-willy@infradead.org/
> 
> 
> test case:
> 1) PCIe3 SSD *4 with LVM
> 2) gfs2 lock_nolock
>     gfs2 attr(T) GFS2_AF_ORLOV
>    # chattr +T /mnt/test
> 3) fio
> fio --name=global --rw=write -bs=1024Ki -size=32Gi -runtime=30 -iodepth 1
> -ioengine sync -zero_buffers=1 -direct=0 -end_fsync=1 -numjobs=1 \
> 	-name write-bandwidth-1 -filename=/mnt/test/sub1/1.txt \
> 	-name write-bandwidth-2 -filename=/mnt/test/sub2/1.txt \
> 	-name write-bandwidth-3 -filename=/mnt/test/sub3/1.txt \
> 	-name write-bandwidth-4 -filename=/mnt/test/sub4/1.txt
> 4) patches[2] are applied to 6.4-rc3.
> 
> 
> 5.15.y result
> 	fio WRITE: bw=5139MiB/s (5389MB/s),
> 6.4-rc3 result
> 	fio  WRITE: bw=2599MiB/s (2725MB/s)

more test result:

5.17.0	WRITE: bw=4988MiB/s (5231MB/s)
5.18.0	WRITE: bw=5165MiB/s (5416MB/s)
5.19.0	WRITE: bw=5511MiB/s (5779MB/s)
6.0.5	WRITE: bw=3055MiB/s (3203MB/s),	WRITE: bw=3225MiB/s (3382MB/s)
6.1.30	WRITE: bw=2579MiB/s (2705MB/s)

so this regression  happen in some code introduced in 6.0,
and maybe some minor regression in 6.1 too?

Best Regards
Wang Yugui (wangyugui@e16-tech.com)
2023/05/28


  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-28 15:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-05-23  0:59 gfs2 write bandwidth regression on 6.4-rc3 compareto 5.15.y Wang Yugui
2023-05-28 15:53 ` Wang Yugui [this message]
2023-07-10 13:19   ` [Cluster-devel] " Andreas Gruenbacher
2023-07-11  0:58     ` Wang Yugui
2023-07-11  1:58       ` Wang Yugui
2023-07-11  2:08     ` Matthew Wilcox

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=20230528235314.7852.409509F4@e16-tech.com \
    --to=wangyugui@e16-tech.com \
    --cc=cluster-devel@redhat.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=djwong@kernel.org \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox