Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [LKP] Re: [percpu_ref] 2b0d3d3e4f: reaim.jobs_per_min -18.4% regression | From | "Xing, Zhengjun" <> | Date | Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:01:32 +0800 |
| |
On 1/11/2021 5:58 PM, Ming Lei wrote: > On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 10:32:47PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -18.4% regression of reaim.jobs_per_min due to commit: >> >> >> commit: 2b0d3d3e4fcfb19d10f9a82910b8f0f05c56ee3e ("percpu_ref: reduce memory footprint of percpu_ref in fast path") >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master >> >> >> in testcase: reaim >> on test machine: 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory >> with following parameters: >> >> runtime: 300s >> nr_task: 100% >> test: short >> cpufreq_governor: performance >> ucode: 0x5002f01 >> >> test-description: REAIM is an updated and improved version of AIM 7 benchmark. >> test-url: https://sourceforge.net/projects/re-aim-7/ >> >> In addition to that, the commit also has significant impact on the following tests: >> >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | vm-scalability: vm-scalability.throughput -2.8% regression | >> | test machine | 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | runtime=300s | >> | | test=lru-file-mmap-read-rand | >> | | ucode=0x5003003 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_process_ops 14.5% improvement | >> | test machine | 144 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-8890 v3 @ 2.50GHz with 512G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | mode=process | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | test=page_fault2 | >> | | ucode=0x16 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | will-it-scale: will-it-scale.per_process_ops -13.0% regression | >> | test machine | 104 threads Skylake with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | mode=process | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | test=malloc1 | >> | | ucode=0x2006906 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | vm-scalability: vm-scalability.throughput -2.3% regression | >> | test machine | 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU @ 2.30GHz with 128G memory | >> | test parameters | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | runtime=300s | >> | | test=lru-file-mmap-read-rand | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | fio-basic: fio.read_iops -4.8% regression | >> | test machine | 192 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz with 192G memory | >> | test parameters | bs=4k | >> | | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | disk=2pmem | >> | | fs=xfs | >> | | ioengine=libaio | >> | | nr_task=50% | >> | | runtime=200s | >> | | rw=randread | >> | | test_size=200G | >> | | time_based=tb | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> | testcase: change | stress-ng: stress-ng.stackmmap.ops_per_sec -45.4% regression | >> | test machine | 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 256G memory | >> | test parameters | class=memory | >> | | cpufreq_governor=performance | >> | | disk=1HDD | >> | | nr_threads=100% | >> | | testtime=10s | >> | | ucode=0x5002f01 | >> +------------------+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+ > Just run a quick test of the last two on 2b0d3d3e4fcf ("percpu_ref: reduce memory footprint of > percpu_ref in fast path) and cf785af19319 ("block: warn if !__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM in bio_crypt_set_ctx()"). > > Not see difference in the two kernel(fio on null_blk with 224 hw queues, > and 'stress-ng --stackmmap-ops') on one 224 cores, dual sockets system. > > BTW this patch itself doesn't touch fast path code, so it is supposed to > not affect performance. > > Can you double check if the test itself is good? I re-test the "fio-basic: fio.read_iops -4.8% regression" for more than 5 times, the average regression is -2.3%. For "stress_ng", normally, it tests a lot of cases one by one. Command 'stress-ng --stackmmap-ops' only test "stackmmap" case. I also tried only test "stackmmap" case, the regression is -7.8%.
But for here, it mainly reports "reaim.jobs_per_min -18.4% regression", I re-test "reaim" case, the result is almost the same. > > Note: cf785af19319 is 2b0d3d3e4fcf^ > > > > Thanks, > Ming > _______________________________________________ > LKP mailing list -- lkp@lists.01.org > To unsubscribe send an email to lkp-leave@lists.01.org
-- Zhengjun Xing
| |