From: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@samsung.com>
To: "'kernel test robot'" <ying.huang@linux.intel.com>,
"'Jaegeuk Kim'" <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
Cc: lkp@01.org, "'LKML'" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [lkp] [f2fs] b9d777b85f: No primary result change, +18023.3% latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_write.vfs_writ
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 11:50:35 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <011401d14e7e$d4900870$7db01950$@samsung.com> (raw)
Hi,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kernel test robot [mailto:ying.huang@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 10:53 AM
> To: Jaegeuk Kim
> Cc: lkp@01.org; LKML; Chao Yu
> Subject: [lkp] [f2fs] b9d777b85f: No primary result change, +18023.3%
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_writ
> e.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_writ
> e.vfs_write.Sy
>
> FYI, we noticed the below changes on
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs dev-test
> commit b9d777b85ff1ff79a1173190317b25bebc404ab4 ("f2fs: check inline_data flag at converting
> time")
>
>
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/disk/filesize/fs/iterations/kconfig/nr_directories/nr_files_per_directory/nr_thre
> ads/rootfs/sync_method/tbox_group/test_size/testcase:
>
> gcc-4.9/1HDD/16MB/f2fs/1x/x86_64-rhel/16d/256fpd/32t/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/NoSync/n
> hm4/60G/fsmark
>
> commit:
> 74fd8d9927ef08db30a85f131a124152aeba66c7
> b9d777b85ff1ff79a1173190317b25bebc404ab4
>
> 74fd8d9927ef08db b9d777b85ff1ff79a117319031
> ---------------- --------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 10.00 ± 0% -10.0% 9.00 ± 0% fsmark.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
> 10.00 ± 0% -10.0% 9.00 ± 0% time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
> 2.35 ± 0% -3.7% 2.26 ± 0% turbostat.%Busy
> 67.30 ± 0% -4.5% 64.30 ± 0% turbostat.Avg_MHz
> 2116 ± 1% -98.7% 27.20 ±110% proc-vmstat.kswapd_inodesteal
> 191431 ± 0% +18.2% 226316 ± 0% proc-vmstat.slabs_scanned
> 56566 ± 0% +21.3% 68612 ± 0% proc-vmstat.workingset_nodereclaim
> 1176917 ± 2% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
> latency_stats.avg.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_convert_inline_inode.[f2fs].f2fs_write_
> begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_
> file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_write.vfs_write.SyS_write.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 62312 ± 55% +1577.8% 1045503 ± 11%
> latency_stats.avg.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_writ
> e.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_writ
> e.vfs_write.SyS_write.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 11969 ± 8% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
> latency_stats.hits.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.get_node_info.[f2fs].read_node_page.[f2fs].
> get_node_page.[f2fs].f2fs_convert_inline_inode.[f2fs].f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perf
> orm_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__
> vfs_write.vfs_write
> 1773702 ± 7% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
> latency_stats.max.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_convert_inline_inode.[f2fs].f2fs_write_
> begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_
> file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_write.vfs_write.SyS_write.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 3.041e+08 ± 2% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
Thanks for your report!
Looks like sum of latency caused by f2fs_lock_op was transferred from
f2fs_convert_inline_inode into f2fs_write_begin.
f2fs_convert_inline_inode:
3.041e+08 ± 2% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
f2fs_write_begin
1743538 ± 56% +18023.3% 3.16e+08 ± 3%
Thanks,
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_convert_inline_inode.[f2fs].f2fs_write_
> begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_
> file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_write.vfs_write.SyS_write.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 163413 ±112% +165.9% 434477 ±147%
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback.[f2fs].f2fs_wait
> _on_page_writeback.[f2fs].get_dnode_of_data.[f2fs].f2fs_reserve_block.[f2fs].f2fs_get_bloc
> k.[f2fs].f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_f
> ile_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_write
> 788095 ±164% -60.4% 312194 ±122%
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_wait_on_page_writeback.[f2fs].f2fs_wait
> _on_page_writeback.[f2fs].update_inode.[f2fs].sync_inode_page.[f2fs].reserve_new_block.[f2
> fs].f2fs_reserve_block.[f2fs].f2fs_get_block.[f2fs].f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perfor
> m_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter
> 1743538 ± 56% +18023.3% 3.16e+08 ± 3%
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perform_writ
> e.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__vfs_writ
> e.vfs_write.SyS_write.entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> 1677147 ± 9% -100.0% 0.00 ± -1%
> latency_stats.sum.call_rwsem_down_read_failed.get_node_info.[f2fs].read_node_page.[f2fs].g
> et_node_page.[f2fs].f2fs_convert_inline_inode.[f2fs].f2fs_write_begin.[f2fs].generic_perfo
> rm_write.__generic_file_write_iter.generic_file_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.[f2fs].__v
> fs_write.vfs_write
>
>
> nhm4: Nehalem
> Memory: 4G
>
> To reproduce:
>
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git
> cd lkp-tests
> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
> bin/lkp run job.yaml
>
>
> Disclaimer:
> Results have been estimated based on internal Intel analysis and are provided
> for informational purposes only. Any difference in system hardware or software
> design or configuration may affect actual performance.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ying Huang
reply other threads:[~2016-01-14 3:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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='011401d14e7e$d4900870$7db01950$@samsung.com' \
--to=chao2.yu@samsung.com \
--cc=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.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
Powered by JetHome