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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox