mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.38->3.0+
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 21:20:57 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120411002057.GC7792@khazad-dum.debian.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120410151326.GA4936@quack.suse.cz>

On Tue, 10 Apr 2012, Jan Kara wrote:
> >   2.6.38:
> >   # dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/null bs=1M iflag=direct count=100
> >   100+0 records in
> >   100+0 records out
> >   104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 1.73126 s, 60.6 MB/s
> > 
> >   3.0:
> >   # dd if=/dev/sdb of=/dev/null bs=1M iflag=direct count=100
> >   100+0 records in
> >   100+0 records out
> >   104857600 bytes (105 MB) copied, 29.4508 s, 3.6 MB/s
> > 
> > That's about 20 times difference on direct read from the
> > same - idle - device!!

You might want to investigate the cpu-idle stuff (especially intel-idle if
it is an Intel box with a recent processor: force the box to use acpi-idle
instead) and the cpufreq stuff (try the test with the box with the
"performance" governor).

> Anyway, the most likely cause seems to be some driver issue (which would
> also explain why you can see it only on one machine). I'd also compare very
> closely config files of the two kernels if there isn't some unexpected
> difference...

Indeed.  But that's such a massive performance drop, I'd also be comparing
the boot log messages of both kernels with diff, and also the lspci -vvv
output...  just in case :-)

-- 
  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-04-11  0:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-30 16:50 dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.32->3.0 Michael Tokarev
2012-04-02 16:58 ` Jonathan Corbet
2012-04-05 23:29 ` Jan Kara
2012-04-06  4:45   ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-10  2:26     ` Dave Chinner
2012-04-10  6:00       ` dramatic I/O slowdown after upgrading 2.6.38->3.0+ Michael Tokarev
2012-04-10 15:13         ` Jan Kara
2012-04-10 19:25           ` Suresh Jayaraman
2012-04-10 19:51             ` Jan Kara
2012-04-11  0:20           ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh [this message]
2012-04-11  9:40           ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-11 17:19             ` Mike Christie
2012-04-11 17:55               ` Michael Tokarev
2012-04-11 18:28               ` Jan Kara

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=20120411002057.GC7792@khazad-dum.debian.net \
    --to=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®