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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 576D0C00A89 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 05:22:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AA6721D91 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 05:22:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727890AbgKBFWf (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 00:22:35 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:59999 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727029AbgKBFWf (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2020 00:22:35 -0500 IronPort-SDR: NJpGpnj2phsXK0o04EOasKxTd58PShqN895s+DrafQxGFMCztTfuVmRDtG91DIIpHGySiYHclD tBhK4AZNtbqQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9792"; a="165332952" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,444,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="165332952" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Nov 2020 21:22:35 -0800 IronPort-SDR: rQhpyjIiH47CqOYU91p1ngBfEgHkdG6jCelVCMiMi2f7NuNfLGNdRw9Ar6tv2abShdG+g/DqbX nk6WLuAsLIZg== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,444,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="537880659" Received: from shao2-debian.sh.intel.com (HELO [10.239.13.3]) ([10.239.13.3]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Nov 2020 21:22:30 -0800 Subject: Re: [mm] e6e88712e4: stress-ng.tmpfs.ops_per_sec -69.7% regression To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Alexey Dobriyan , Chris Wilson , Huang Ying , Hugh Dickins , Jani Nikula , Matthew Auld , William Kucharski , Qian Cai , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org, lkp@intel.com, feng.tang@intel.com, zhengjun.xing@intel.com References: <20201030071715.GV31092@shao2-debian> <20201030131711.GJ27442@casper.infradead.org> <20201030145835.GL27442@casper.infradead.org> From: Rong Chen Message-ID: Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:21:39 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201030145835.GL27442@casper.infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/30/20 10:58 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 10:02:45PM +0800, Chen, Rong A wrote: >> On 10/30/2020 9:17 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 03:17:15PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >>>> Details are as below: >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> >>>> >>>> >>>> To reproduce: >>>> >>>> git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git >>>> cd lkp-tests >>>> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email >>>> bin/lkp run job.yaml >>> Do you actually test these instructions before you send them out? >>> >>> hdd_partitions: "/dev/disk/by-id/ata-WDC_WD2500BEKT-00PVMT0_WD-WX11A23L4840-part >>> 1" >>> ssd_partitions: "/dev/nvme1n1p1 /dev/nvme0n1p1" >>> rootfs_partition: "/dev/disk/by-id/ata-INTEL_SSDSC2CW240A3_CVCV204303WP240CGN-part1" >>> >>> That's _very_ specific to a given machine. I'm not familiar with >>> this test, so I don't know what I need to change. >> >> Hi Matthew, >> >> Sorry about that, I copied the job.yaml file from the server, >> the right way to do is to set your disk partitions in the yaml, >> please see https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests#run-your-own-disk-partitions. >> >> there is another reproduce script attached in the original mail >> for your reference. > Can you reproduce this? Here's my results: > > # stress-ng "--timeout" "100" "--times" "--verify" "--metrics-brief" "--sequential" "96" "--class" "memory" "--minimize" "--exclude" "spawn,exec,swap,stack,atomic,bad-altstack,bsearch,context,full,heapsort,hsearch,judy,lockbus,lsearch,malloc,matrix-3d,matrix,mcontend,membarrier,memcpy,memfd,memrate,memthrash,mergesort,mincore,null,numa,pipe,pipeherd,qsort,radixsort,remap,resources,rmap,shellsort,skiplist,stackmmap,str,stream,tlb-shootdown,tree,tsearch,vm-addr,vm-rw,vm-segv,vm,wcs,zero,zlib" > stress-ng: info: [7670] disabled 'oom-pipe' as it may hang or reboot the machine (enable it with the --pathological option) > stress-ng: info: [7670] dispatching hogs: 96 tmpfs > stress-ng: info: [7670] successful run completed in 100.23s (1 min, 40.23 secs) > stress-ng: info: [7670] stressor bogo ops real time usr time sys time bogo ops/s bogo ops/s > stress-ng: info: [7670] (secs) (secs) (secs) (real time) (usr+sys time) > stress-ng: info: [7670] tmpfs 8216 100.10 368.02 230.89 82.08 13.72 > stress-ng: info: [7670] for a 100.23s run time: > stress-ng: info: [7670] 601.38s available CPU time > stress-ng: info: [7670] 368.71s user time ( 61.31%) > stress-ng: info: [7670] 231.55s system time ( 38.50%) > stress-ng: info: [7670] 600.26s total time ( 99.81%) > stress-ng: info: [7670] load average: 78.32 27.87 10.10 > Hi Matthew, IIUC, yes, we can reproduce it, here is the result from the server: $ stress-ng --timeout 100 --times --verify --metrics-brief --sequential 96 --class memory --minimize --exclude spawn,exec,swap,stack,atomic,bad-altstack,bsearch,context,full,heapsort,hsearch,judy,lockbus,lsearch,malloc,matrix-3d,matrix,mcontend,membarrier,memcpy,memfd,memrate,memthrash,mergesort,mincore,null,numa,pipe,pipeherd,qsort,radixsort,remap,resources,rmap,shellsort,skiplist,stackmmap,str,stream,tlb-shootdown,tree,tsearch,vm-addr,vm-rw,vm-segv,vm,wcs,zero,zlib stress-ng: info:  [2765] disabled 'oom-pipe' as it may hang or reboot the machine (enable it with the --pathological option) stress-ng: info:  [2765] dispatching hogs: 96 tmpfs stress-ng: info:  [2765] successful run completed in 104.67s (1 min, 44.67 secs) stress-ng: info:  [2765] stressor       bogo ops real time  usr time  sys time   bogo ops/s   bogo ops/s stress-ng: info:  [2765]                           (secs) (secs)    (secs)   (real time) (usr+sys time) stress-ng: info:  [2765] tmpfs               363    103.02 622.07   7289.85         3.52         0.05 stress-ng: info:  [2765] for a 104.67s run time: stress-ng: info:  [2765]   10047.98s available CPU time stress-ng: info:  [2765]     622.46s user time   (  6.19%) stress-ng: info:  [2765]    7290.66s system time ( 72.56%) stress-ng: info:  [2765]    7913.12s total time  ( 78.75%) stress-ng: info:  [2765] load average: 79.62 28.89 10.45 we compared the tmpfs.ops_per_sec: (363 / 103.02) between this commit and parent commit. Best Regards, Rong Chen