linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alex,Shi" <alex.shi@intel.com>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: "Li, Shaohua" <shaohua.li@intel.com>,
	"tytso@mit.edu" <tytso@mit.edu>,
	"czoccolo@gmail.com" <czoccolo@gmail.com>,
	"vgoyal@redhat.com" <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	"jaxboe@fusionio.com" <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Chen, Tim C" <tim.c.chen@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [performance bug] kernel building regression on 64 LCPUs machine
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 15:52:52 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1295509972.4773.301.camel@debian> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110119125630.GB4246@quack.suse.cz>

On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 20:56 +0800, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 19-01-11 10:03:26, Shaohua Li wrote:
> > add Jan and Theodore to the loop.
>   Thanks.
> 
> > On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 09:55 +0800, Shi, Alex wrote:
> > > Shaohua and I tested kernel building performance on latest kernel. and
> > > found it is drop about 15% on our 64 LCPUs NHM-EX machine on ext4 file
> > > system. We find this performance dropping is due to commit
> > > 749ef9f8423054e326f. If we revert this patch or just change the
> > > WRITE_SYNC back to WRITE in jbd2/commit.c file. the performance can be
> > > recovered.
> > >
> > > iostat report show with the commit, read request merge number increased
> > > and write request merge dropped. The total request size increased and
> > > queue length dropped. So we tested another patch: only change WRITE_SYNC
> > > to WRITE_SYNC_PLUG in jbd2/commit.c, but nothing effected.
> > since WRITE_SYNC_PLUG doesn't work, this isn't a simple no-write-merge issue.
> >
> > > we didn't test deadline IO mode, just test cfq. seems insert write
> > > request into sync queue effect much read performance, but we don't know
> > > details. What's your comments of this?
>   Indeed it seems that the optimization of the case where we wait for the
> transaction is negatively impacting the performance when we are not. Does
> patch below help for your load? It refines the logic when WRITE_SYNC
> is needed (of course, we should also test whether the patch works for fsync
> heavy loads as well).
>   The patch is mostly a proof of concept and only lightly tested so be
> careful...
> 

I tested the patch after remove t_synchronous_commit lines in
include/trace/events/jbd2.h on 2.6.38-rc1 kernel. 
but did not find clear improvement on kbuild. 


         


  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-20  7:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-19  1:55 [performance bug] kernel building regression on 64 LCPUs machine Alex,Shi
2011-01-19  2:03 ` Shaohua Li
2011-01-19 12:56   ` Jan Kara
2011-01-20  7:52     ` Alex,Shi [this message]
2011-01-20 15:16   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-01-21  7:17     ` Shaohua Li
2011-01-26  8:15     ` Shaohua Li
2011-02-12  9:21       ` Alex,Shi
2011-02-12 18:25         ` Corrado Zoccolo
2011-02-14  2:25           ` Alex,Shi
2011-02-15  1:10             ` Shaohua Li
2011-02-21 16:49               ` Jan Kara
2011-02-23  8:24                 ` Alex,Shi
2011-02-24 12:13                   ` Jan Kara
2011-02-25  0:44                     ` Alex Shi
2011-02-26 14:45                     ` Corrado Zoccolo
2011-03-01 19:56                       ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-02  9:42                         ` Jan Kara
2011-03-02 16:13                           ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-02 21:17                             ` Jan Kara
2011-03-02 21:20                               ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-03  1:14                               ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-04 15:32                                 ` Jan Kara
2011-03-04 15:40                                   ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-04 15:50                                   ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-04 18:27                                     ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-22  7:38                                       ` Alex,Shi
2011-03-22 16:14                                         ` Jan Kara
2011-03-22 17:46                                           ` Jeff Moyer
2011-03-24  6:45                                             ` Alex,Shi
2011-03-28 19:48                                             ` Jan Kara
2011-01-19 14:32 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-01-20  2:12   ` Shaohua Li
2011-01-21  7:23 ` Corrado Zoccolo
2011-01-21  7:47   ` Alex,Shi
2011-01-21  7:52     ` Alex,Shi
2011-01-21  8:13       ` Corrado Zoccolo
2011-01-21  8:20   ` Shaohua Li

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=1295509972.4773.301.camel@debian \
    --to=alex.shi@intel.com \
    --cc=czoccolo@gmail.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shaohua.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=tytso@mit.edu \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).