From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: steven@ngls.net
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 12564] New: poor performance while preprocessing source code
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:05:06 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090128170506.37161fb6@tleilax.poochiereds.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090128132942.c957a199.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:29:42 -0800
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> (switched to email. Please respond via emailed reply-to-all, not via the
> bugzilla web interface).
>
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:29:52 -0800 (PST)
> bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote:
>
> > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12564
> >
> > Summary: poor performance while preprocessing source code
> > Product: IO/Storage
>
> Thanks for the report.
>
> > Version: 2.5
> > KernelVersion: 2.6.28.2
> > Platform: All
> > OS/Version: Linux
> > Tree: Mainline
> > Status: NEW
> > Severity: normal
> > Priority: P1
> > Component: Other
> > AssignedTo: io_other@kernel-bugs.osdl.org
> > ReportedBy: steven@ngls.net
> >
> >
> > Latest working kernel version: 2.6.26-rc3
> > Earliest failing kernel version: 2.6.26-rc4 (or 2.6.26-rc3 + patch)
>
> (huge performance regression in NFS)
>
> > Distribution: gentoo
> >
> > Hardware Environment:
> > Various 32 and 64 bit Intel and AMD machines with various
> > PATA and SATA disks and various network interfaces.
> >
> > Problem Description:
> > Here's my situation. I've recently upgraded the kernels
> > on ~30 computers at work (from 2.6.21 to 2.6.27). These
> > computers are used to build and test software we develop.
> > We speed up the building process using distcc. However,
> > after the kernel upgrade, the builds are much much slower.
> > The preprocessing stage seems to be at least 10 times
> > slower.
> > As evidence of this slowdown I am attaching two images created
> > using distccmon-gnome. Both snapshots were taken shortly
> > after starting builds in a clean sandbox. The only difference
> > is the kernel. "fast.png" was generated while running
> > kernel 2.6.25.20. "slow.png" was generated with 2.6.26.
> > The light purple sections indicate the preprocessing times
> > for each file.
> > This slowdown is observed on both 32 and 64 bit computers
> > and using either gcc or the intel compiler. (The intel compiler
> > builds do not use distcc, but that are also slower.) Strangely
> > enough, it's still faster to use an NFS mounted sandbox on a
> > machine with an older kernel than the same sandbox on the local
> > machine with a newer kernel. (This suggests to me that it
> > is neither a disk or network IO problem.)
> > I've used git bisect to narrow it down to a single commit:
> > # bad: [b0b539739fe9b7d75002412a787cfdf4efddbc33] NFS: Ensure that 'noac'
> > and/or 'actimeo=0' turn off attribute caching
>
> And thanks for bisecting it.
>
It's a pretty small patch. The obvious question is: "What mount options
are you using on your NFS mounts?"
> > This is the first commit after v2.6.26-rc3. I'm not an
> > experienced git user, so I don't know how to narrow it down
> > further. Distccmon-gnome snapshots from the bisection
> > process are similar to the ones noted above.
> > Naturally, I would like the newer kernels to have similar
> > performance to the older kernels.
> > I will be attaching various items. Let me know what other
> > information might be helpful.
> >
> > Steps to reproduce:
> > distccmon-gnome &
> > # using a makefile setup to use distcc:
> > make -j 5 all
> > # note preprocessing times in distccmon
> >
>
> Something I don't understand from this:
>
> If your normal setup is using distcc then what role does NFS have to
> play? I mean, distcc kind-of replaces NFS in this workload.
>
> Perhaps you could briefly describe the topology/data-flow/etc so that
> we can see how NFS could be a bottleneck here?
>
> Thanks.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-28 22:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <bug-12564-10286@http.bugzilla.kernel.org/>
2009-01-28 21:29 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-28 22:05 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2009-01-29 1:02 ` Steven Patrick
2009-01-29 1:37 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 13:27 ` Trond Myklebust
2009-01-28 22:43 ` Steven Patrick
2009-01-28 23:04 ` Andrew Morton
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=20090128170506.37161fb6@tleilax.poochiereds.net \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bugme-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steven@ngls.net \
/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