From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 289AAC433E7 for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:44:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2ABA206CB for ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:44:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oracle.com header.i=@oracle.com header.b="IwIM2O39" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2404108AbgJLRoD (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:44:03 -0400 Received: from userp2120.oracle.com ([156.151.31.85]:56230 "EHLO userp2120.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2403994AbgJLRoD (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 13:44:03 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09CHXmIV090586; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:42:47 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=HxRv3Dnw2IAVYw6cW4Yey20sM14OKFhTKaxaAYHS+eU=; b=IwIM2O39+FMP9Gq07P/h7h6dDkk0m71A6MfqoFem1PNDJbUyX/8+goNFyRqRDFmOzhe2 n8lkKks/FpuzbzJewOmwJOB/3YjVWmwm+Y7pPtNO8EWfcbr3SRZQhNh2RYFO8mXCfiN2 gAXt7kVAVdhkItIqaos6n0PGQ2DQsf4aL4QVl9i/s2feo062VKuP5Pb1wNlAq77jV2cy 4oqnf8Ea407RDsm7SgL3Y4Gv3ztFLhKzBv8uxV3a6ycrX50+FchYFe5Xq5S69g37WDxj 1MyHyGgwz1WsrGCFvgEruxlaaGotu18JCckIp6x7ISdpJVk+vl6jGhG1CG2x2nCDb/WG gw== Received: from aserp3020.oracle.com (aserp3020.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 343vae4q62-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:42:47 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 09CHV9jA022013; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:40:46 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 343puwvasd-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:40:46 +0000 Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 09CHegFt031643; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 17:40:43 GMT Received: from [192.168.2.112] (/50.38.35.18) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:40:42 -0700 Subject: Re: [LKP] Re: [hugetlbfs] c0d0381ade: vm-scalability.throughput -33.4% regression To: Xing Zhengjun , kernel test robot Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Hugh Dickins , Naoya Horiguchi , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Andrea Arcangeli , "Kirill A.Shutemov" , Davidlohr Bueso , Prakash Sangappa , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org References: <20200622005551.GK5535@shao2-debian> <718e1653-b273-096b-0ee3-f720cf794612@oracle.com> <691152ef-6787-9598-4445-fd2a0164f70f@oracle.com> <1f6d321e-96b4-18c3-2991-d6a2e94c9e60@oracle.com> <68992a81-a1b9-467b-59c4-48ab65c601c5@linux.intel.com> From: Mike Kravetz Message-ID: <7540556c-1e07-51b2-d903-829a887ef5b6@oracle.com> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2020 10:40:40 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <68992a81-a1b9-467b-59c4-48ab65c601c5@linux.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9772 signatures=668681 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2010120135 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9772 signatures=668681 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1011 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2010120135 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/11/20 10:29 PM, Xing Zhengjun wrote: > Hi Mike, > > I re-test it in v5.9-rc8, the regression still existed. It is almost the same as 34ae204f1851. Do you have time to look at it? Thanks. > Thank you for testing. Just curious, did you apply the series in this thread or just test v5.9-rc8? If just testing v5.9-rc8, no changes to this code were added after 34ae204f1851, so results being the same are expected. There are some functional issues with this new hugetlb locking model that are currently being worked. It is likely to result in significantly different code. The performance issues discovered here will be taken into account with the new code. However, as previously mentioned additional synchronization is required for functional correctness. As a result, there will be some regression in this code. -- Mike Kravetz > ========================================================================================= > tbox_group/testcase/rootfs/kconfig/compiler/runtime/size/test/cpufreq_governor/ucode: > > lkp-knm01/vm-scalability/debian-x86_64-20191114.cgz/x86_64-rhel-7.6/gcc-7/300s/8T/anon-cow-seq-hugetlb/performance/0x11 > > commit: > 49aef7175cc6eb703a9280a7b830e675fe8f2704 > c0d0381ade79885c04a04c303284b040616b116e > v5.8 > 34ae204f18519f0920bd50a644abd6fefc8dbfcf > v5.9-rc1 > v5.9-rc8 > > 49aef7175cc6eb70 c0d0381ade79885c04a04c30328 v5.8 34ae204f18519f0920bd50a644a v5.9-rc1 v5.9-rc8 > ---------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- > %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev > \ | \ | \ | \ | \ | \ > 38043 ± 3% -30.2% 26560 ± 4% -29.5% 26815 ± 6% -7.4% 35209 ± 2% -7.4% 35244 -8.8% 34704 vm-scalability.median > 7.86 ± 19% +9.7 17.54 ± 21% +10.4 18.23 ± 34% -3.1 4.75 ± 7% -4.5 3.36 ± 7% -4.0 3.82 ± 15% vm-scalability.median_stddev% > 12822071 ± 3% -34.1% 8450822 ± 4% -33.6% 8517252 ± 6% -10.7% 11453675 ± 2% -10.2% 11513595 ± 2% -11.6% 11331657 vm-scalability.throughput > 2.523e+09 ± 3% -20.7% 2.001e+09 ± 5% -19.9% 2.021e+09 ± 7% +6.8% 2.694e+09 ± 2% +7.3% 2.707e+09 ± 2% +5.4% 2.661e+09 vm-scalability.workload > > > On 8/22/2020 7:36 AM, Mike Kravetz wrote: >> On 8/21/20 2:02 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote: >>> Would you be willing to test this series on top of 34ae204f1851? I will need >>> to rebase the series to take the changes made by 34ae204f1851 into account. >> >> Actually, the series in this thread will apply/run cleanly on top of >> 34ae204f1851. No need to rebase or port. If we decide to move forward more >> work is required. See a few FIXME's in the patches. >>