From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932409AbcHPCir (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 22:38:47 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:33215 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932307AbcHPCip (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 22:38:45 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,528,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="1036156056" Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [sctp] a6c2f79287: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -37.2% regression To: Xin Long References: <20160727015425.GL21454@yexl-desktop> <20160805033109.GA28539@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> <20160808021031.GA17837@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> Cc: kernel test robot , Stephen Rothwell , lkp@01.org, "David S. Miller" , LKML From: Aaron Lu Message-ID: <40242f99-adce-752b-0859-d702a614bc5e@intel.com> Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:38:31 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160808021031.GA17837@aaronlu.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Any update on this, Long? Regards, Aaron On 08/08/2016 10:10 AM, Aaron Lu wrote: > On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 07:53:38PM +0800, Xin Long wrote: >>>> It doesn't make much sense to me. the codes I added cannot be >>>> triggered without enable any pr policies. and I also did the tests in >>> >>> It seems these pr policies has to be turned on by user space, i.e. >>> netperf in this case? >>> >>> I checked netperf's source code, it doesn't seem set any option >>> related to SCTP PR POLICY but I'm new to network code so I could be >>> wrong or missing something. >>> >>>> my local environment, the result looks normal to me compare to >>>> prior version. >>> >>> Can you share your number? >>> We run netperf like this: >>> netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 >>> The full log of the run is attached for your reference. >> >> Now I also changed to linux-net.git >> >> commit 96b585267f552d4b6a28ea8bd75e5ed03deb6e71 >> [root@hp-dl388g8-08 ~]# uname -r >> 4.7.0.new >> [root@hp-dl388g8-08 ~]# netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- >> -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 >> SCTP 1-TO-MANY STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to >> 127.0.0.1 () port 0 AF_INET >> Recv Send Send Utilization Service Demand >> Socket Socket Message Elapsed Send Recv Send Recv >> Size Size Size Time Throughput local remote local remote >> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/s % S % S us/KB us/KB >> >> 212992 212992 10240 300.00 11814.56 4.65 4.65 0.775 0.774 >> >> >> commit f959fb442c35f4b61fea341401b8463dd0a1b959 (just before the buggie patch) > > I'm testing on Linus' master, can we all use that please? > >> [root@localhost ~]# netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m >> 10K -H 127.0.0.1 >> SCTP 1-TO-MANY STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to >> 127.0.0.1 () port 0 AF_INET >> Recv Send Send Utilization Service Demand >> Socket Socket Message Elapsed Send Recv Send Recv >> Size Size Size Time Throughput local remote local remote >> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/s % S % S us/KB us/KB >> >> 212992 212992 10240 300.00 9454.90 5.22 5.22 1.086 1.085 >> >> >> I did tests on physical machine. >> did you do it on guest ? > > The test is done on a ivy-bridge desktop with 8G memory: > # cpudesc : Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-3220 CPU @ 3.30GHz > # total memory : 8058152 kB > >> >>> >>>> >>>> Recently the sctp performance is not stable, as during these patches, >>>> netperf cannot get the result, but return ENOTCONN. which may >>>> also affect the testing. anyway we've fixed the -ENOTCONN issue >>>> already in the latest version. >>> >>> I tested commit 96b585267f55, which is Linus' git tree HEAD on 08/03, I >>> guess the fix you mentioned should already be in there? But >>> unfortunately, the throughput of netperf is still at low number(we did >>> the test 5 times): >>> $ cat */netperf.json >>> { >>> "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ >>> 2470.6974999999998 >>> ] >>> }{ >>> "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ >>> 2486.7675 >>> ] >>> }{ >>> "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ >>> 2478.945 >>> ] >>> }{ >>> "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ >>> 2429.465 >>> ] >>> }{ >>> "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ >>> 2476.9150000000004 >>> ] >>> >>> Considering what you have said that the patch shouldn't make a >>> difference, the performance drop is really confusing. Any idea what >>> could be the cause? Thanks. >> Now I saw your tests result against the new kernel >> >> Could you do the same test on the kernel before the problematic commit ? > > Yes, the throughput of its parent commit is higer enough to trigger the > automatic bisect and then we send out the report. > > Throughput of its parent commit 826d253d57b1("sctp: add SCTP_PR_ASSOC_STATUS > on sctp sockopt"): > Average: > "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": 3923.84375, > > $ cat */netperf.json > { > "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ > 3869.25375 > ] > }{ > "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ > 3952.58875 > ] > }{ > "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ > 3936.89625 > ] > }{ > "netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [ > 3936.63625 > ] > } > > Feel free to let me know if you need any more information or you want me > to do more tests on other commits/machines, thanks. > > Regards, > Aaron >