On 03/13, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > @Chao Yu/@Jaegeuk Kim: I'm considering to add this to the regressions > report for 4.11; or is there a reason why it shouldn't be considered a > regression? Ciao, Thorsten
Hi, I'm planning to submit f2fs updates for 4.11-rcX including a patch which resolves this issue as well, as I expect. https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/3/7/813 Thanks, > > On 08.03.2017 02:21, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > Greeting, > > > > We noticed a -33.7 regression of aim7.jobs-per-min due to commit: > > > > commit: 4ac912427c4214d8031d9ad6fbc3bc75e71512df ("f2fs: introduce free nid > > bitmap") > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > > > > in testcase: aim7 > > on test machine: 40 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2690 v2 @ 3.00GHz with > > 384G memory > > with following parameters: > > > > disk: 1BRD_48G > > fs: f2fs > > test: disk_wrt > > load: 3000 > > cpufreq_governor: performance > > > > test-description: AIM7 is a traditional UNIX system level benchmark suite > > which is used to test and measure the performance of multiuser system. > > test-url: https://sourceforge.net/projects/aimbench/files/aim-suite7/ > > > > > > > > Details are as below: > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> > > > > > > To reproduce: > > > > git clone > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wfg/lkp-tests.git > > cd lkp-tests > > bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email > > bin/lkp run job.yaml > > > > testcase/path_params/tbox_group/run: > > aim7/1BRD_48G-f2fs-disk_wrt-3000-performance/lkp-ivb-ep01 > > > > ced2c7ea8e99b467 4ac912427c4214d8031d9ad6fb > > ---------------- -------------------------- > > %stddev change %stddev > > \ | \ > > 117419 ± 1% -33.7% 77863 ± 0% aim7.jobs-per-min > > 153.78 ± 1% +50.6% 231.63 ± 0% aim7.time.elapsed_time > > 153.78 ± 1% +50.6% 231.63 ± 0% aim7.time.elapsed_time.max > > 805644 ± 3% +11.3% 896604 ± 0% > > aim7.time.involuntary_context_switches > > 5408 ± 1% +15.4% 6240 ± 0% aim7.time.system_time > > 5066069 ± 0% +10.5% 5600256 ± 9% meminfo.DirectMap2M > > 135538 ± 8% -41.9% 78738 ± 8% meminfo.Dirty > > 980.67 ± 16% -67.8% 315.50 ± 12% meminfo.Writeback > > 71322 ± 10% -44.0% 39953 ± 1% numa-meminfo.node0.Dirty > > 11158 ± 18% -27.1% 8132 ± 0% numa-meminfo.node0.Mapped > > 56776 ± 6% -32.5% 38309 ± 0% numa-meminfo.node1.Dirty > > 9684 ± 22% +30.9% 12676 ± 0% numa-meminfo.node1.Mapped > > 6069 ± 57% -78.1% 1328 ± 18% softirqs.NET_RX > > 619333 ± 4% +8.0% 669152 ± 3% softirqs.RCU > > 128030 ± 2% +33.3% 170724 ± 0% softirqs.SCHED > > 2331994 ± 1% +15.3% 2688290 ± 0% softirqs.TIMER > > 7701 ± 1% -35.7% 4948 ± 3% vmstat.io.bo > > 64.67 ± 2% -39.7% 39.00 ± 2% vmstat.procs.b > > 333.33 ± 7% -48.5% 171.50 ± 2% vmstat.procs.r > > 17530 ± 1% -23.4% 13425 ± 1% vmstat.system.cs > > 47642 ± 1% -5.3% 45100 ± 1% vmstat.system.in > > 33522 ± 4% -43.1% 19068 ± 0% proc-vmstat.nr_dirty > > 236.00 ± 14% -66.1% 80.00 ± 3% proc-vmstat.nr_writeback > > 33907 ± 4% -43.3% 19222 ± 0% > > proc-vmstat.nr_zone_write_pending > > 28194 ± 10% +10.4% 31131 ± 6% proc-vmstat.pgactivate > > 746402 ± 2% +24.6% 929960 ± 3% proc-vmstat.pgfault > > 153.78 ± 1% +50.6% 231.63 ± 0% time.elapsed_time > > 153.78 ± 1% +50.6% 231.63 ± 0% time.elapsed_time.max > > 805644 ± 3% +11.3% 896604 ± 0% > > time.involuntary_context_switches > > 3524 ± 0% -23.4% 2701 ± 0% > > time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got > > 5408 ± 1% +15.4% 6240 ± 0% time.system_time > > 12.19 ± 1% +36.7% 16.66 ± 0% time.user_time > > 48260939 ± 3% +12.1% 54110616 ± 2% cpuidle.C1-IVT.time > > 33149237 ± 5% +52.6% 50597349 ± 1% cpuidle.C1E-IVT.time > > 89642 ± 4% +52.8% 136976 ± 0% cpuidle.C1E-IVT.usage > > 13534795 ± 6% +276.3% 50934566 ± 55% cpuidle.C3-IVT.time > > 42893 ± 6% +138.8% 102439 ± 30% cpuidle.C3-IVT.usage > > 6.431e+08 ± 2% +390.1% 3.152e+09 ± 10% cpuidle.C6-IVT.time > > 802009 ± 2% +375.3% 3811880 ± 10% cpuidle.C6-IVT.usage > > 1535987 ± 4% +156.3% 3936830 ± 4% cpuidle.POLL.time > > 88.14 ± 0% -24.9% 66.17 ± 3% turbostat.%Busy > > 2659 ± 0% -44.7% 1471 ± 3% turbostat.Avg_MHz > > 3016 ± 0% -26.3% 2224 ± 0% turbostat.Bzy_MHz > > 5.20 ± 5% +127.0% 11.80 ± 2% turbostat.CPU%c1 > > > > > > > > perf-stat.page-faults > > > > 1e+06 > > ++-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > > 900000 O+O O O O O O O O > > | > > | O O O O O O O O O O > > | > > 800000 ++ .*.*. .*. .*. .*.. > > | > > 700000 ++*.*.*.*.*..*.* *.*.*.*.*.*..*.* * *.*.*.*.* *.*.*.* > > * > > | : : > > | > > 600000 ++: : > > | > > 500000 ++ : > > :| > > 400000 ++ : > > :| > > |: : > > :| > > 300000 ++ : > > :| > > 200000 ++ : > > :| > > | : > > | > > 100000 ++ : > > | > > 0 > > *+------------------------------------O-O------------------------*-+ > > > > > > perf-stat.minor-faults > > > > 1e+06 > > ++-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > > 900000 O+O O O O O O O O > > | > > | O O O O O O O O O O > > | > > 800000 ++ .*.*. .*. .*. .*.. > > | > > 700000 ++*.*.*.*.*..*.* *.*.*.*.*.*..*.* * *.*.*.*.* *.*.*.* > > * > > | : : > > | > > 600000 ++: : > > | > > 500000 ++ : > > :| > > 400000 ++ : > > :| > > |: : > > :| > > 300000 ++ : > > :| > > 200000 ++ : > > :| > > | : > > | > > 100000 ++ : > > | > > 0 > > *+------------------------------------O-O------------------------*-+ > > > > > > aim7.jobs-per-min > > > > 140000 > > ++-----------------------------------------------------------------+ > > | *. .*.. .*.*.*.*.*.*.*..*.*.*.*.*.*. > > | > > 120000 ++: *.*.* *.*.* *.*.*.*.*..*.*.*. > > * > > | : * > > | > > 100000 ++: : > > | > > |: : > > | > > 80000 O+O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O : > > :| > > |: : > > :| > > 60000 ++ : > > :| > > |: : > > :| > > 40000 ++ : > > :| > > | : > > :| > > 20000 ++ : > > | > > | : > > | > > 0 > > *+------------------------------------O-O------------------------*-+ > > > > > > > > [*] bisect-good sample > > [O] bisect-bad sample > > > > > > Disclaimer: > > Results have been estimated based on internal Intel analysis and are > > provided > > for informational purposes only. Any difference in system hardware or > > software > > design or configuration may affect actual performance. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Xiaolong > >
