From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Cc: markw@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
Subject: Re: 2.6.5-rc3-mm4
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2004 09:43:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <406DFABD.8070400@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040402115601.24912093.akpm@osdl.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> markw@osdl.org wrote:
>
>>I reran DBT-2 to with ext2 and ext3 (in case you were still interested)
>> on my 4-way Xeon system with 60+ drives:
>> http://developer.osdl.org/markw/fs/dbt2_project_results.html
>>
>> Aside from the from the drop you're already aware of since 2.6.3, it
>> looks like DBT-2 takes another smaller hit after 2.6.5-rc3-mm2. Here's
>> a brief summary from the link above:
>
>
> The profile is interesting:
>
> 3671973 poll_idle 63309.8793
> 77750 __copy_from_user_ll 637.2951
> 64788 generic_unplug_device 487.1278
> 62968 DAC960_LP_InterruptHandler 336.7273
> 53908 finish_task_switch 361.7987
> 52947 __copy_to_user_ll 441.2250
> 29419 dm_table_unplug_all 439.0896
> 25947 __make_request 17.9938
> 18564 dm_table_any_congested 199.6129
> 13785 update_queue 104.4318
> 13498 try_to_wake_up 20.3590
> 12736 __wake_up 114.7387
> 12560 kmem_cache_alloc 163.1169
> 12221 .text.lock.sched 40.7367
>
> - There's a ton of idle time there.
>
> - The CPU scheduler is hurting. Nick and Ingo are patching up a storm to
> fix a similar problem which Jeremy Higdon is observing at 200,000
> IOs/sec. This will get better.
Versus this for 2.6.3:
12825181 poll_idle 221123.8103
219606 schedule 126.7201
194233 __copy_from_user_ll 1541.5317
191707 __copy_to_user_ll 1597.5583
149704 DAC960_LP_InterruptHandler 800.5561
120972 generic_unplug_device 822.9388
87891 __make_request 60.9931
49207 try_to_wake_up 74.5561
42647 do_anonymous_page 65.5100
Which looks like it is taking a lot longer (is it the same test?)
It is difficult to tell how idle each one is due to lack of total
ticks reported, but, copy_to/from_user is 3% the amount of idle
time in 2.6.3, while being 3.5% the amount of idle time in your
profile.
So 2.6.3 could be relatively more idle than -mm.
Do we know what the 2.6.3 regression is caused by? Or is it
likely to be the CPU scheduler?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-03 0:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-01 10:05 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Andrew Morton
2004-04-01 12:02 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Marc-Christian Petersen
2004-04-01 15:16 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Greg KH
2004-04-01 15:32 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Marc-Christian Petersen
2004-04-01 14:12 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Norberto Bensa
2004-04-02 1:35 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Joshua Kwan
2004-04-02 2:09 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Norberto Bensa
2004-04-01 23:12 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 (compile stats) John Cherry
2004-04-02 19:04 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 markw
2004-04-02 19:56 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Andrew Morton
2004-04-02 20:46 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 markw
2004-04-02 23:43 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
2004-04-03 0:10 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Mark Wong
2004-04-03 0:12 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Nick Piggin
2004-04-06 15:20 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 markw
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-02 3:09 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Sid Boyce
2004-04-03 11:08 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Sid Boyce
2004-04-04 1:15 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Paul Blazejowski
2004-04-04 23:34 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Trond Myklebust
2004-04-05 1:25 ` 2.6.5-rc3-mm4 Paul Blazejowski
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=406DFABD.8070400@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=axboe@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=markw@osdl.org \
/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