mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>, Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Cc: oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev, lkp@intel.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	HAN Yuwei <hrx@bupt.moe>,
	linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [btrfs] b7fdfd29a1: postmark.transactions 9.5% regression
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2025 18:19:59 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2adac975-01f1-4640-a073-715c804987d6@gmx.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202510271449.efa21738-lkp@intel.com>



在 2025/10/27 18:11, kernel test robot 写道:
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> kernel test robot noticed a 9.5% regression of postmark.transactions on:
> 
> 
> commit: b7fdfd29a136a17c5c8ad9e9bbf89c48919c3d19 ("btrfs: only set the device specific options after devices are opened")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
> 
> 
> we are in fact not sure what's the connection between this change and the
> postmark.transactions performance. still report out due to below checks.
> 
> [still regression on      linus/master 4bb1f7e19c4a1d6eeb52b80acff5ac63edd1b91d]
> [regression chould be solved by reverting this commit on linus/master head]
> [still regression on linux-next/master 72fb0170ef1f45addf726319c52a0562b6913707]
> 
> testcase: postmark
> config: x86_64-rhel-9.4
> compiler: gcc-14
> test machine: 224 threads 4 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8380H CPU @ 2.90GHz (Cooper Lake) with 192G memory
> parameters:
> 
> 	disk: 1HDD
> 	fs: btrfs
> 	fs1: nfsv4
> 	number: 4000n
> 	trans: 10000s
> 	subdirs: 100d
> 	cpufreq_governor: performance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202510271449.efa21738-lkp@intel.com
> 
> 
> Details are as below:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
> 
> 
> The kernel config and materials to reproduce are available at:
> https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251027/202510271449.efa21738-lkp@intel.com
> 
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/fs1/fs/kconfig/number/rootfs/subdirs/tbox_group/testcase/trans:
>    gcc-14/performance/1HDD/nfsv4/btrfs/x86_64-rhel-9.4/4000n/debian-13-x86_64-20250902.cgz/100d/lkp-cpl-4sp2/postmark/10000s
> 
> commit:
>    53a4acbfc1 ("btrfs: fix memory leak on duplicated memory in the qgroup assign ioctl")

This is definitely not related.

>    b7fdfd29a1 ("btrfs: only set the device specific options after devices are opened")

But this may affect performance, because without this fix, btrfs always 
falls back to `ssd` mount option

Now it will properly detect rotating devices, and won't set `ssd` mount 
option by default.

But if this is causing performance drop, we should really consider if 
`ssd` should be the only mode we support.

Thanks,
Qu

> 
> 53a4acbfc1de85fa b7fdfd29a136a17c5c8ad9e9bbf
> ---------------- ---------------------------
>           %stddev     %change         %stddev
>               \          |                \
>        2010           +10.5%       2222        nfsstat.Client.nfs.v4.open_noat
>       97983 ± 11%     +18.5%     116101        numa-numastat.node1.other_node
>       97983 ± 11%     +18.5%     116101        numa-vmstat.node1.numa_other
>       16001 ±  5%      -7.5%      14797 ±  5%  sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load.avg
>     1474354 ±  3%      +9.9%    1620281 ±  4%  sched_debug.cpu.avg_idle.avg
>      756151 ±  3%     +10.0%     831539 ±  4%  sched_debug.cpu.max_idle_balance_cost.avg
>        3585            -2.6%       3490        perf-stat.i.context-switches
>        6141 ±  2%      +4.0%       6385        perf-stat.i.cycles-between-cache-misses
>        5796 ±  2%      +3.9%       6024        perf-stat.overall.cycles-between-cache-misses
>        3580            -2.6%       3486        perf-stat.ps.context-switches
>   9.548e+11            +7.3%  1.025e+12        perf-stat.total.instructions
>      136494            +4.3%     142419        proc-vmstat.nr_inactive_file
>      136494            +4.3%     142419        proc-vmstat.nr_zone_inactive_file
>     2784208            +4.8%    2917180        proc-vmstat.numa_hit
>     2435763            +5.5%    2568673        proc-vmstat.numa_local
>     3042276            +5.1%    3196281        proc-vmstat.pgalloc_normal
>     2627503            +6.9%    2808220        proc-vmstat.pgfault
>     2754381            +5.4%    2903034        proc-vmstat.pgfree
>       97857            +6.3%     104058        proc-vmstat.pgreuse
>        9.80            -9.4%       8.88        postmark.creation_mixed_trans
>      112312            -7.0%     104473        postmark.data_read
>      203502            -7.0%     189298        postmark.data_written
>        9.80            -9.4%       8.88        postmark.deletion_mixed_trans
>        9.73            -9.5%       8.80        postmark.files_appended
>       12.59            -7.0%      11.70        postmark.files_created
>       12.59            -7.0%      11.70        postmark.files_deleted
>        9.87            -9.5%       8.93        postmark.files_read
>      715.35            +7.5%     768.93        postmark.time.elapsed_time
>      715.35            +7.5%     768.93        postmark.time.elapsed_time.max
>       51508            -1.6%      50690        postmark.time.voluntary_context_switches
>       19.61            -9.5%      17.75        postmark.transactions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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.
> 
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-27  7:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-27  7:41 kernel test robot
2025-10-27  7:49 ` Qu Wenruo [this message]
2025-10-28  5:14   ` Oliver Sang
2025-10-31 19:20   ` David Sterba

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=2adac975-01f1-4640-a073-715c804987d6@gmx.com \
    --to=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=hrx@bupt.moe \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=oe-lkp@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
    --cc=wqu@suse.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®