* [lkp] [selinux] 759b31c1d4: unixbench.score -9.7% regression
@ 2016-03-31 2:38 kernel test robot
2016-04-19 21:10 ` Paul Moore
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2016-03-31 2:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Paul Moore; +Cc: LKML, lkp
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3227 bytes --]
FYI, we noticed that unixbench.score -9.7% regression on
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
commit 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91 ("selinux: simply inode label states to INVALID and INITIALIZED")
=========================================================================================
compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/nr_task/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase:
gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/1/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/ivb42/pipe/unixbench
commit:
48c2353e841141683e13771ecd6684350004ccac
759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91
48c2353e84114168 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669e
---------------- --------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev
\ | \
1972 ± 0% -9.7% 1781 ± 0% unixbench.score
16298 ± 5% -12.4% 14272 ± 5% cpuidle.C1-IVT.usage
10890 ± 19% +84.8% 20129 ± 28% cpuidle.POLL.usage
2394 ±153% +93.8% 4641 ± 90% numa-meminfo.node1.Inactive(anon)
2545 ±146% +89.6% 4827 ± 86% numa-meminfo.node1.Shmem
598.25 ±153% +93.9% 1160 ± 90% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_inactive_anon
636.00 ±146% +89.7% 1206 ± 86% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_shmem
19716 ± 8% -17.5% 16267 ± 12% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.min_vruntime.stddev
19716 ± 8% -17.5% 16267 ± 12% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.spread0.stddev
lkp-wsx02: Westmere-EX
Memory: 128G
unixbench.score
2000 *+**-*--*-*-----------------*-**-*-**-**-*-**-*-**-------------------+
| * **.**. + : *.*.**.**. |
| *.**.*.** : : *.**.*
1950 ++ *.* |
| |
| |
1900 ++ |
| |
1850 ++ |
| |
| |
1800 ++ O |
| OO OO O O O OO O OO O |
O OO O OO O |
1750 ++-------------------------------------------------------------------+
[*] bisect-good sample
[O] bisect-bad sample
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,
Xiaolong Ye
[-- Attachment #2: job.yaml --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 3332 bytes --]
---
LKP_SERVER: inn
LKP_CGI_PORT: 80
LKP_CIFS_PORT: 139
testcase: unixbench
default-monitors:
wait: activate-monitor
kmsg:
uptime:
iostat:
heartbeat:
vmstat:
numa-numastat:
numa-vmstat:
numa-meminfo:
proc-vmstat:
proc-stat:
interval: 10
meminfo:
slabinfo:
interrupts:
lock_stat:
latency_stats:
softirqs:
bdi_dev_mapping:
diskstats:
nfsstat:
cpuidle:
cpufreq-stats:
turbostat:
pmeter:
sched_debug:
interval: 60
cpufreq_governor: performance
default-watchdogs:
oom-killer:
watchdog:
commit: 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91
model: Ivytown Ivy Bridge-EP
nr_cpu: 48
memory: 64G
swap_partitions: LABEL=SWAP
rootfs_partition: LABEL=LKP-ROOTFS
category: benchmark
nr_task: 1
unixbench:
test: pipe
queue: bisect
testbox: ivb42
tbox_group: ivb42
kconfig: x86_64-rhel
enqueue_time: 2016-03-30 10:44:16.582190367 +08:00
compiler: gcc-4.9
rootfs: debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz
id: fff12b0a8b8d6a6314eb8757fd395a5284e6cedd
user: lkp
head_commit: 4295cd27530fceea236531b4ba60c24e17c4386a
base_commit: f55532a0c0b8bb6148f4e07853b876ef73bc69ca
branch: linux-devel/devel-hourly-2016033003
result_root: "/result/unixbench/performance-1-pipe/ivb42/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/0"
job_file: "/lkp/scheduled/ivb42/bisect_unixbench-performance-1-pipe-debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz-x86_64-rhel-759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91-20160330-100665-1o2xvx-0.yaml"
max_uptime: 934.4599999999999
initrd: "/osimage/debian/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz"
bootloader_append:
- root=/dev/ram0
- user=lkp
- job=/lkp/scheduled/ivb42/bisect_unixbench-performance-1-pipe-debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz-x86_64-rhel-759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91-20160330-100665-1o2xvx-0.yaml
- ARCH=x86_64
- kconfig=x86_64-rhel
- branch=linux-devel/devel-hourly-2016033003
- commit=759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91
- BOOT_IMAGE=/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/vmlinuz-4.5.0-rc3-00074-g759b31c
- max_uptime=934
- RESULT_ROOT=/result/unixbench/performance-1-pipe/ivb42/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/0
- LKP_SERVER=inn
- |2-
earlyprintk=ttyS0,115200 systemd.log_level=err
debug apic=debug sysrq_always_enabled rcupdate.rcu_cpu_stall_timeout=100
panic=-1 softlockup_panic=1 nmi_watchdog=panic oops=panic load_ramdisk=2 prompt_ramdisk=0
console=ttyS0,115200 console=tty0 vga=normal
rw
lkp_initrd: "/lkp/lkp/lkp-x86_64.cgz"
modules_initrd: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/modules.cgz"
bm_initrd: "/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/lkp.cgz,/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/run-ipconfig.cgz,/osimage/deps/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/turbostat.cgz,/lkp/benchmarks/turbostat.cgz,/lkp/benchmarks/unixbench.cgz"
linux_headers_initrd: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/linux-headers.cgz"
repeat_to: 2
kernel: "/pkg/linux/x86_64-rhel/gcc-4.9/759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91/vmlinuz-4.5.0-rc3-00074-g759b31c"
dequeue_time: 2016-03-30 10:48:22.914520698 +08:00
job_state: finished
loadavg: 0.93 0.81 0.34 1/524 4793
start_time: '1459306145'
end_time: '1459306276'
version: "/lkp/lkp/.src-20160330-091754"
[-- Attachment #3: reproduce --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 4538 bytes --]
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu0/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu1/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu10/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu11/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu12/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu13/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu14/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu15/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu16/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu17/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu18/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu19/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu2/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu20/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu21/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu22/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu23/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu24/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu25/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu26/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu27/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu28/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu29/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu3/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu30/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu31/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu32/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu33/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu34/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu35/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu36/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu37/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu38/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu39/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu4/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu40/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu41/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu42/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu43/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu44/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu45/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu46/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu47/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu5/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu6/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu7/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu8/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:04 echo performance > /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu9/cpufreq/scaling_governor
2016-03-30 10:49:05 ./Run pipe -c 1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [lkp] [selinux] 759b31c1d4: unixbench.score -9.7% regression
2016-03-31 2:38 [lkp] [selinux] 759b31c1d4: unixbench.score -9.7% regression kernel test robot
@ 2016-04-19 21:10 ` Paul Moore
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Paul Moore @ 2016-04-19 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kernel test robot; +Cc: LKML, lkp
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:38 PM, kernel test robot
<xiaolong.ye@intel.com> wrote:
> FYI, we noticed that unixbench.score -9.7% regression on
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master
> commit 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91 ("selinux: simply inode label states to INVALID and INITIALIZED")
Thanks for reporting this; it took a while, but I believe we have
resolved this in the SELinux next branch with three patches that were
merged today.
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/nr_task/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase:
> gcc-4.9/performance/x86_64-rhel/1/debian-x86_64-2015-02-07.cgz/ivb42/pipe/unixbench
>
> commit:
> 48c2353e841141683e13771ecd6684350004ccac
> 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669ee838fb3131cd91
>
> 48c2353e84114168 759b31c1d4295a1dab34b4669e
> ---------------- --------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 1972 ą 0% -9.7% 1781 ą 0% unixbench.score
> 16298 ą 5% -12.4% 14272 ą 5% cpuidle.C1-IVT.usage
> 10890 ą 19% +84.8% 20129 ą 28% cpuidle.POLL.usage
> 2394 ą153% +93.8% 4641 ą 90% numa-meminfo.node1.Inactive(anon)
> 2545 ą146% +89.6% 4827 ą 86% numa-meminfo.node1.Shmem
> 598.25 ą153% +93.9% 1160 ą 90% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_inactive_anon
> 636.00 ą146% +89.7% 1206 ą 86% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_shmem
> 19716 ą 8% -17.5% 16267 ą 12% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.min_vruntime.stddev
> 19716 ą 8% -17.5% 16267 ą 12% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.spread0.stddev
>
> lkp-wsx02: Westmere-EX
> Memory: 128G
>
>
>
> unixbench.score
>
> 2000 *+**-*--*-*-----------------*-**-*-**-**-*-**-*-**-------------------+
> | * **.**. + : *.*.**.**. |
> | *.**.*.** : : *.**.*
> 1950 ++ *.* |
> | |
> | |
> 1900 ++ |
> | |
> 1850 ++ |
> | |
> | |
> 1800 ++ O |
> | OO OO O O O OO O OO O |
> O OO O OO O |
> 1750 ++-------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
> [*] bisect-good sample
> [O] bisect-bad sample
>
> 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,
> Xiaolong Ye
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-04-19 21:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-03-31 2:38 [lkp] [selinux] 759b31c1d4: unixbench.score -9.7% regression kernel test robot
2016-04-19 21:10 ` Paul Moore
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®