From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754884AbcFQFmC (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:42:02 -0400 Received: from LGEAMRELO12.lge.com ([156.147.23.52]:43601 "EHLO lgeamrelo12.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753830AbcFQFl7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:41:59 -0400 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.126 X-Original-MAILFROM: minchan@kernel.org X-Original-SENDERIP: 165.244.98.150 X-Original-MAILFROM: minchan@kernel.org X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.223.161 X-Original-MAILFROM: minchan@kernel.org Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:41:56 +0900 From: Minchan Kim To: "Huang, Ying" CC: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Rik van Riel , Michal Hocko , LKML , Linus Torvalds , Michal Hocko , Vinayak Menon , Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [mm] 5c0a85fad9: unixbench.score -6.3% regression Message-ID: <20160617054156.GB2374@bbox> References: <20160606022724.GA26227@yexl-desktop> <20160606095136.GA79951@black.fi.intel.com> <87a8iw5enf.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> <8760tk5aym.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> <20160608085811.GB12655@black.fi.intel.com> <20160614085728.GA2430@bbox> <20160614143417.GC3571@node.shutemov.name> <877fdqxb5x.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com> <20160616001323.GL17127@bbox> <87a8ikkbvj.fsf@yhuang-mobile.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87a8ikkbvj.fsf@yhuang-mobile.sh.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on LGEKRMHUB02/LGE/LG Group(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 2016/06/17 14:41:56, Serialize by Router on LGEKRMHUB02/LGE/LG Group(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 2016/06/17 14:41:56, Serialize complete at 2016/06/17 14:41:56 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:27:44PM -0700, Huang, Ying wrote: > Minchan Kim writes: > > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 07:52:26AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote: > >> "Kirill A. Shutemov" writes: > >> > >> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 05:57:28PM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 11:58:11AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > >> >> > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 04:41:37PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote: > >> >> > > "Huang, Ying" writes: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > "Kirill A. Shutemov" writes: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > >> On Mon, Jun 06, 2016 at 10:27:24AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> FYI, we noticed a -6.3% regression of unixbench.score due to commit: > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> commit 5c0a85fad949212b3e059692deecdeed74ae7ec7 ("mm: make faultaround produce old ptes") > >> >> > > >>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> in testcase: unixbench > >> >> > > >>> on test machine: lituya: 16 threads Haswell High-end Desktop (i7-5960X 3.0G) with 16G memory > >> >> > > >>> with following parameters: cpufreq_governor=performance/nr_task=1/test=shell8 > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> Details are as below: > >> >> > > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> ========================================================================================= > >> >> > > >>> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/nr_task/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase: > >> >> > > >>> gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/1/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lituya/shell8/unixbench > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> commit: > >> >> > > >>> 4b50bcc7eda4d3cc9e3f2a0aa60e590fedf728c5 > >> >> > > >>> 5c0a85fad949212b3e059692deecdeed74ae7ec7 > >> >> > > >>> > >> >> > > >>> 4b50bcc7eda4d3cc 5c0a85fad949212b3e059692de > >> >> > > >>> ---------------- -------------------------- > >> >> > > >>> fail:runs %reproduction fail:runs > >> >> > > >>> | | | > >> >> > > >>> 3:4 -75% :4 kmsg.DHCP/BOOTP:Reply_not_for_us,op[#]xid[#] > >> >> > > >>> %stddev %change %stddev > >> >> > > >>> \ | \ > >> >> > > >>> 14321 . 0% -6.3% 13425 . 0% unixbench.score > >> >> > > >>> 1996897 . 0% -6.1% 1874635 . 0% unixbench.time.involuntary_context_switches > >> >> > > >>> 1.721e+08 . 0% -6.2% 1.613e+08 . 0% unixbench.time.minor_page_faults > >> >> > > >>> 758.65 . 0% -3.0% 735.86 . 0% unixbench.time.system_time > >> >> > > >>> 387.66 . 0% +5.4% 408.49 . 0% unixbench.time.user_time > >> >> > > >>> 5950278 . 0% -6.2% 5583456 . 0% unixbench.time.voluntary_context_switches > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> That's weird. > >> >> > > >> > >> >> > > >> I don't understand why the change would reduce number or minor faults. > >> >> > > >> It should stay the same on x86-64. Rise of user_time is puzzling too. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > unixbench runs in fixed time mode. That is, the total time to run > >> >> > > > unixbench is fixed, but the work done varies. So the minor_page_faults > >> >> > > > change may reflect only the work done. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > >> Hm. Is reproducible? Across reboot? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > And FYI, there is no swap setup for test, all root file system including > >> >> > > benchmark files are in tmpfs, so no real page reclaim will be > >> >> > > triggered. But it appears that active file cache reduced after the > >> >> > > commit. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > 111331 . 1% -13.3% 96503 . 0% meminfo.Active > >> >> > > 27603 . 1% -43.9% 15486 . 0% meminfo.Active(file) > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I think this is the expected behavior of the commit? > >> >> > > >> >> > Yes, it's expected. > >> >> > > >> >> > After the change faularound would produce old pte. It means there's more > >> >> > chance for these pages to be on inactive lru, unless somebody actually > >> >> > touch them and flip accessed bit. > >> >> > >> >> Hmm, tmpfs pages should be in anonymous LRU list and VM shouldn't scan > >> >> anonymous LRU list on swapless system so I really wonder why active file > >> >> LRU is shrunk. > >> > > >> > Hm. Good point. I don't why we have anything on file lru if there's no > >> > filesystems except tmpfs. > >> > > >> > Ying, how do you get stuff to the tmpfs? > >> > >> We put root file system and benchmark into a set of compressed cpio > >> archive, then concatenate them into one initrd, and finally kernel use > >> that initrd as initramfs. > > > > I see. > > > > Could you share your 4 full vmstat(/proc/vmstat) files? > > > > old: > > > > cat /proc/vmstat > before.old.vmstat > > do benchmark > > cat /proc/vmstat > after.old.vmstat > > > > new: > > > > cat /proc/vmstat > before.new.vmstat > > do benchmark > > cat /proc/vmstat > after.new.vmstat > > > > IOW, I want to see stats related to reclaim. > > Hi, > > The /proc/vmstat for the parent commit (parent-proc-vmstat.gz) and first > bad commit (fbc-proc-vmstat.gz) are attached with the email. > > The contents of the file is more than the vmstat before and after > benchmark running, but are sampled every 1 seconds. Every sample begin > with "time: