From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6499AC433E0 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 03:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24C04206F1 for ; Tue, 19 Jan 2021 03:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389618AbhASDCU (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:02:20 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:2881 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727953AbhASDCS (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jan 2021 22:02:18 -0500 IronPort-SDR: Mc5RZhIQqFrCchRaQ4qd3uo+EpP7JPX7YYn9NfyglCwzvLCjm+51KvsF3mImAfs4gqRLqqIlwT 574Us1actG8w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9868"; a="165961067" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,357,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="165961067" Received: from orsmga008.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.65]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jan 2021 19:01:37 -0800 IronPort-SDR: mfCuK8AldyifUVtmxH7ERnY4Lw6Dbm3+p1YlnOmSpMDneA36I2SHelltehP26Xh9Be/YfflLfe jEVFH4YxqXvA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.79,357,1602572400"; d="scan'208";a="383767685" Received: from xingzhen-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.238.6.97]) ([10.238.6.97]) by orsmga008-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 18 Jan 2021 19:01:35 -0800 Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [percpu_ref] 2b0d3d3e4f: reaim.jobs_per_min -18.4% regression To: Ming Lei , kernel test robot Cc: Jens Axboe , Veronika Kabatova , Christoph Hellwig , Tejun Heo , Sagi Grimberg , Bart Van Assche , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com References: <20210110143247.GA6259@xsang-OptiPlex-9020> <20210111095854.GA4155851@T590> From: "Xing, Zhengjun" Message-ID: <0a3f09f3-6712-a66f-8a9a-fb31b9d1a564@intel.com> Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:01:32 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210111095854.GA4155851@T590> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 1/11/2021 5:58 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 10:32:47PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -18.4% regression of reaim.jobs_per_min due to commit: >> >> >> commit: 2b0d3d3e4fcfb19d10f9a82910b8f0f05c56ee3e ("percpu_ref: reduce memory footprint of percpu_ref in fast path") >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master >> >> >> in testcase: reaim >> on test machine: 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory >> with following parameters: >> >> runtime: 300s >> nr_task: 100% >> test: short >> cpufreq_governor: performance >> ucode: 0x5002f01 >> >> test-description: REAIM is an updated and improved version of AIM 7 benchmark. >> test-url: https://sourceforge.net/projects/re-aim-7/ >> >> In addition to that, the commit also has significant impact on the following tests: >> >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | vm-scalability: vm-scalability.throughput -2.8% regression | >> | test machine | 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | runtime=300s | >> | | test=lru-file-mmap-read-rand | >> | | ucode=0x5003003 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_process_ops 14.5% improvement | >> | test machine | 144 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-8890 v3 @ 2.50GHz with 512G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | mode=process | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | test=page_fault2 | >> | | ucode=0x16 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -13.0% regression | >> | test machine | 104 threads Skylake with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | mode=process | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | test=malloc1 | >> | | ucode=0x2006906 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | vm-scalability: vm-scalability.throughput -2.3% regression | >> | test machine | 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU @ 2.30GHz with 128G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | runtime=300s | >> | | test=lru-file-mmap-read-rand | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | fio-basic: fio.read_iops -4.8% regression | >> | test machine | 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | bs=4k | >> | | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | disk=2pmem | >> | | fs=xfs | >> | | ioengine=libaio | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | runtime=200s | >> | | rw=randread | >> | | test_size=200G | >> | | time_based=tb | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | stress-ng: stress-ng.stackmmap.ops_per_sec -45.4% regression | >> | test machine | 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 256G memory | >> | test parameters | class=memory | >> | | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | disk=1HDD | >> | | nr_threads=100% | >> | | testtime=10s | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > Just run a quick test of the last two on 2b0d3d3e4fcf ("percpu_ref: reduce memory footprint of > percpu_ref in fast path) and cf785af19319 ("block: warn if !__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM in bio_crypt_set_ctx()"). > > Not see difference in the two kernel(fio on null_blk with 224 hw queues, > and 'stress-ng --stackmmap-ops') on one 224 cores, dual sockets system. > > BTW this patch itself doesn't touch fast path code, so it is supposed to > not affect performance. > > Can you double check if the test itself is good? I re-test the "fio-basic: fio.read_iops -4.8% regression"  for more than 5 times, the average regression is -2.3%. For "stress_ng", normally, it tests a lot of cases one by one. Command  'stress-ng --stackmmap-ops' only test  "stackmmap" case. I also tried only test "stackmmap" case, the regression is -7.8%. But for here, it mainly reports "reaim.jobs_per_min -18.4% regression", I re-test  "reaim" case, the result is almost the same. > > Note: cf785af19319 is 2b0d3d3e4fcf^ > > > > Thanks, > Ming > _______________________________________________ > LKP mailing list -- lkp@lists.01.org > To unsubscribe send an email to lkp-leave@lists.01.org -- Zhengjun Xing