From: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
To: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.38->3.0+
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 17:13:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120410151326.GA4936@quack.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F83CC86.2010805@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
On Tue 10-04-12 10:00:38, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> On 10.04.2012 06:26, Dave Chinner wrote:
>
> > Barriers. Turn them off, and see if that fixes your problem.
>
> Thank you Dave for a hint. And nope, that's not it, not at all... ;)
> While turning off barriers helps a tiny bit, to gain a few %% from
> the huge slowdown, it does not cure the issue.
>
> Meanwhile, I observed the following:
>
> 1) the issue persists on more recent kernels too, I tried 3.3
> and it is also as slow as 3.0.
>
> 2) at least 2.6.38 kernel works fine, as fast as 2.6.32, I'll
> try 2.6.39 next.
>
> I updated $subject accordingly.
>
> 3) the most important thing I think: this is general I/O speed
> issue. Here's why:
>
> 2.6.38:
> # dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/null bs=1M iflag=direct count=100
> 100+0 records in
> 100+0 records out
> 104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 1.73126 s, 60.6 MB/s
>
> 3.0:
> # dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/null bs=1M iflag=direct count=100
> 100+0 records in
> 100+0 records out
> 104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 29.4508 s, 3.6 MB/s
>
> That's about 20 times difference on direct read from the
> same - idle - device!!
Huh, that's a huge difference for such a trivial load. So we can rule out
filesystems, writeback, mm. I also wouldn't think it's IO scheduler but
you can always check by comparing dd numbers after
echo none >/sys/block/sdb/queue/scheduler
Anyway, the most likely cause seems to be some driver issue (which would
also explain why you can see it only on one machine). I'd also compare very
closely config files of the two kernels if there isn't some unexpected
difference...
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-10 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-30 16:50 dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.32->3.0 Michael Tokarev
2012-04-02 16:58 ` Jonathan Corbet
2012-04-05 23:29 ` Jan Kara
2012-04-06 4:45 ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-10 2:26 ` Dave Chinner
2012-04-10 6:00 ` dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.38->3.0+ Michael Tokarev
2012-04-10 15:13 ` Jan Kara [this message]
2012-04-10 19:25 ` Suresh Jayaraman
2012-04-10 19:51 ` Jan Kara
2012-04-11 0:20 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2012-04-11 9:40 ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-11 17:19 ` Mike Christie
2012-04-11 17:55 ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-11 18:28 ` Jan Kara
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=20120410151326.GA4936@quack.suse.cz \
--to=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
/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).