From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1758047AbcH3KGl (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 30 Aug 2016 06:06:41 -0400
Received: from outbound-smtp05.blacknight.com ([81.17.249.38]:43344 "EHLO
        outbound-smtp05.blacknight.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756959AbcH3KGk (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 30 Aug 2016 06:06:40 -0400
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:06:33 +0100
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@alibaba-inc.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, lkp@01.org
Subject: Re: [lkp] [mm, page_alloc] e6cbd7f2ef: pixz.throughput -5.1%
 regression
Message-ID: <20160830100633.GU8119@techsingularity.net>
References: <20160808082924.GB8581@yexl-desktop>
 <05540bdb-5b31-c75f-887f-64f60ce2580e@leemhuis.info>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <05540bdb-5b31-c75f-887f-64f60ce2580e@leemhuis.info>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 11:51:20AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Lo! On 08.08.2016 10:29, kernel test robot wrote:
> > 
> > FYI, we noticed a -5.1% regression of pixz.throughput due to commit:
> > 
> > commit e6cbd7f2efb433d717af72aa8510a9db6f7a7e05 ("mm, page_alloc: remove fair zone allocation policy")
> > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> > 
> > in testcase: pixz
> > on test machine: 48 threads Ivytown Ivy Bridge-EP with 64G memory
> > with following parameters:
> > 
> > 	nr_threads: 100%
> > 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> 
> Mel, this report made it to the regression list for 4.8, but it seems
> nothing happened after the initial report. Was it discussed (and maybe
> even fixed?) elsewhere? Or was it deemed not important enough? Should I
> drop it for the regression list?
> 

Drop it for the moment.

My expectation is that it's a relatively minor hazard. The removal of the
fair zone allocation policy is a shorter path which benefits a number
of workloads but also potentially changes the color of pages used in
microbenchmarks which can have a cache effect.  It's on my TODO list to
reproduce this exactly as LKP does but my own preliminary experiments using
pbzip (yes, it's different) on 4 machines showed gains on all 4 machines
so something relatively subtle is going on or it's machine specific.

-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs