From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com,
fengwei.yin@intel.com, aubrey.li@linux.intel.com,
yu.c.chen@intel.com
Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [sched/numa] 0fb3978b0a: stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_sec -18.9% regression
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2022 11:24:04 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220309112404.GH15701@techsingularity.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87tuc7fp9k.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, Mar 09, 2022 at 05:28:55PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Hi, All,
>
> "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> writes:
>
> > Hi, Oliver,
> >
> > Thanks for report.
> >
> > I still cannot connect the regression with the patch yet. To double
> > check, I have run test again with "sched_verbose" kernel command line,
> > and verified that the sched_domain isn't changed at all with the patch.
> >
> > kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com> writes:
> >> 0.11 6% +0.1 0.16 4% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.update_rq_clock
> >> 0.00 +0.1 0.06 6% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.memset_erms
> >> 0.00 +0.1 0.07 5% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.get_pid_task
> >> 0.06 7% +0.1 0.17 6% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.select_task_rq_fair
> >> 0.54 5% +0.1 0.68 perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_return
> >> 4.26 +1.1 5.33 perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.common_perm_cond
> >> 15.45 +4.9 20.37 perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_put_or_lock
> >> 20.12 +6.7 26.82 perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.lockref_get_not_dead
> >
> > From the perf-profile above, the most visible change is more cycles in
> > lockref_get_not_dead(), which will loop with cmpxchg on
> > dentry->d_lockref. So this appears to be related to the memory layout.
> > I will try to debug that.
> >
> > Because stress-ng is a weird "benchmark" although it's a very good
> > functionality test, and I cannot connect the patch with the test case
> > and performance metrics collected. I think this regression should be a
> > low priority one which shouldn't prevent the merging etc. But I will
> > continue to investigate the regression to try to root cause it.
>
> Done more investigation for this. It turns out the sched_domain has
> been changed after commit 0fb3978b0a, although it's not shown in default
> sched_verbose output. sd->imb_numa_nr of level "NUMA" has been changed
> from 24 to 12 after the commit. So the following debug patch restore
> the performance.
>
If Ice Lake has multiple last level caches per socket (I didn't check)
then the sd->imb_numa_nr would have changed. I didn't dig into what
stress-ng fstat is doing as it's a stress test more than a performance
test but given that the number of threads is 10% of the total, it's
possible that the workload is being split across nodes differently.
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-09 11:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-02 14:02 [sched/numa] 0fb3978b0a: stress-ng.fstat.ops_per_sec -18.9% regression kernel test robot
2022-03-03 8:43 ` Huang, Ying
2022-03-09 9:28 ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2022-03-09 11:24 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
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=20220309112404.GH15701@techsingularity.net \
--to=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=aubrey.li@linux.intel.com \
--cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=lkp@lists.01.org \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.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