From: Aaron Lu <aaron.lu@intel.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
lkp@01.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [sctp] a6c2f79287: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -37.2% regression
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 13:04:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47965feb-3a4d-4e07-a9ed-86a3d58fb911@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_feA94rUXH9QgCT7Yei0QBg5=4Mz9g2TKwX9B5P5kMMug@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/16/2016 05:56 PM, Xin Long wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm testing on Linus' master, can we all use that please?
>>>>
>>>
>>> [git] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git
>>>
>>> [mechine]
>>> Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v2 @ 3.00GHz
>>> mem 62G (66000220K)
>>>
>>> [system]
>>> # cat /etc/redhat-release
>>> Red Hat Enterprise Linux Server release 7.3 Beta (Maipo)
>>>
>>> [commit 3684b03]
>>> [root@hp-dl380pg8-11 lxin]# uname -r
>>> 4.8.0-rc2.3684b03
>>> [root@hp-dl380pg8-11 lxin]# cat test.sh
>>> killall -0 netserver || netserver -4 &
>>> netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1
>>
>> I just realized the test we are doing is not exactly the same.
>> As the original report says:
>> ip: ipv4
>> runtime: 300s
>> nr_threads: 200%
>> cluster: cs-localhost
>> send_size: 10K
>> test: SCTP_STREAM_MANY
>> cpufreq_governor: performance
>>
>> Note the nr_threads: 200%, which means to start 2 times of CPU number
>> processes of netperf.
>>
>> In our IVB i3(2 cores, 2 threads per core) case, 8 netperf processes
>> are started concurrently:
> OK, understand.
>
>>
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>> 2016-07-27 03:48:09 netperf -4 -t SCTP_STREAM_MANY -c -C -l 300 -- -m 10K -H 127.0.0.1 &
>>
>> The throughput is the average of those runs.
>>
>> And I think we should be doing test on:
>> commit a6c2f79287 ("sctp: implement prsctp TTL policy") (the bisected one)
>> and
>> commit 826d253d57 ("sctp: add SCTP_PR_ASSOC_STATUS on sctp sockopt") (its immediate parent)
>> instead of Linus' master HEAD to avoid other factors.
>>
> OK, I will do tests as your suggestion now, but need to rebuild again :D
>
> can you disable pr_enable with "sysctl -w net.sctp.prsctp_enable=0",
> then try again?
For commit a6c2f79287 ("sctp: implement prsctp TTL policy"), no matter
the value of net.sctp.prsctp_enable, the throughput is almost the same:
net.sctp.prsctp_enable = 0
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
2353.3112499999997
]
}
net.sctp.prsctp_enable = 1
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
2371.5862500000003
]
}
For its immediate parent:
commit 826d253d57 ("sctp: add SCTP_PR_ASSOC_STATUS on sctp sockopt")
No matter the value of net.sctp.prsctp_enable, the throughput is again
almost the same:
net.sctp.prsctp_enable = 0
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
3838.8300000000004
]
}
net.sctp.prsctp_enable = 1
{
"netperf.Throughput_Mbps": [
3751.4600000000005
]
}
Does this result give any hint?
Thanks,
Aaron
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 5:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-27 1:54 kernel test robot
2016-07-28 7:01 ` Xin Long
2016-08-05 3:31 ` [LKP] " Aaron Lu
2016-08-05 11:53 ` Xin Long
2016-08-08 2:10 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 2:38 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:02 ` Xin Long
2016-08-16 8:30 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 8:51 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 9:56 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:04 ` Aaron Lu [this message]
2016-08-17 5:34 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 5:34 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 5:41 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 6:14 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:37 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 6:42 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:35 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 7:42 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 7:53 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 8:02 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 8:48 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 8:58 ` Xin Long
2016-08-17 9:20 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-17 18:06 ` Xin Long
2016-08-18 3:21 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-18 12:45 ` Xin Long
2016-08-19 5:29 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-19 7:19 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-19 7:24 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-22 21:44 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2016-08-23 9:19 ` Aaron Lu
2016-09-30 7:05 ` Aaron Lu
2016-10-03 2:32 ` Xin Long
2016-10-09 7:41 ` Aaron Lu
2016-08-16 18:34 ` Xin Long
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=47965feb-3a4d-4e07-a9ed-86a3d58fb911@intel.com \
--to=aaron.lu@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.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
Powered by JetHome