On 03/14, Chao Yu wrote:
>On 2017/3/14 3:22, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
>> 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
>
>Sorry for late repay.
>
>I expect below patches in Jaegeuk's tree could help to recover the performance
>as well
>
> f2fs: skip scanning free nid bitmap of full NAT blocks
> f2fs: combine nat_bits and free_nid_bitmap cache
These 2 patches do help recover the performance back. Details as below.
Tested-by: Xiaolong Ye <xiaolong...@intel.com>
commit:
4ac912427c4214d8031d9ad6fbc3bc75e71512df ("f2fs: introduce free nid bitmap")
ced2c7ea8e99b46755a270872cd5ba61c27cffad <= parent commit of 4ac912427c
c0e39d642e41be12937f4532721fc2538182e264 ("f2fs: combine nat_bits and
free_nid_bitmap cache")
4ac912427c4214d8 ced2c7ea8e99b46755a270872c c0e39d642e41be12937f453272
---------------- -------------------------- --------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev %change %stddev
\ | \ | \
77863 ± 0% +50.8% 117419 ± 1% +50.9% 117500 ± 0%
aim7.jobs-per-min
231.63 ± 0% -33.6% 153.78 ± 1% -33.7% 153.67 ± 0%
aim7.time.elapsed_time
231.63 ± 0% -33.6% 153.78 ± 1% -33.7% 153.67 ± 0%
aim7.time.elapsed_time.max
896604 ± 0% -10.1% 805644 ± 3% -20.8% 710207 ± 1%
aim7.time.involuntary_context_switches
6240 ± 0% -13.3% 5408 ± 1% -14.2% 5353 ± 1%
aim7.time.system_time
1111357 ± 3% -1.3% 1097209 ± 2% -7.8% 1024716 ± 0%
aim7.time.voluntary_context_switches
5600256 ± 9% -9.5% 5066069 ± 0% -9.3% 5078220 ± 13%
meminfo.DirectMap2M
78738 ± 8% +72.1% 135538 ± 8% +23.2% 96995 ± 6%
meminfo.Dirty
315.50 ± 12% +210.8% 980.67 ± 16% +123.9% 706.40 ± 22%
meminfo.Writeback
1328 ± 18% +357.1% 6069 ± 57% +231.1% 4397 ± 75%
softirqs.NET_RX
669152 ± 3% -7.4% 619333 ± 4% -14.4% 572896 ± 1%
softirqs.RCU
170724 ± 0% -25.0% 128030 ± 2% -23.0% 131531 ± 4%
softirqs.SCHED
2688290 ± 0% -13.3% 2331994 ± 1% -14.7% 2292443 ± 1%
softirqs.TIMER
4948 ± 3% +55.6% 7701 ± 1% +55.8% 7710 ± 0%
vmstat.io.bo
39.00 ± 2% +65.8% 64.67 ± 2% -52.8% 18.40 ± 30%
vmstat.procs.b
171.50 ± 2% +94.4% 333.33 ± 7% +29.7% 222.40 ± 7%
vmstat.procs.r
13425 ± 1% +30.6% 17530 ± 1% +43.9% 19321 ± 10%
vmstat.system.cs
45100 ± 1% +5.6% 47642 ± 1% +6.3% 47957 ± 0%
vmstat.system.in
19068 ± 0% +75.8% 33522 ± 4% +24.5% 23745 ± 5%
proc-vmstat.nr_dirty
80.00 ± 3% +195.0% 236.00 ± 14% +126.0% 180.80 ± 23%
proc-vmstat.nr_writeback
19222 ± 0% +76.4% 33907 ± 4% +24.9% 24004 ± 5%
proc-vmstat.nr_zone_write_pending
Thanks,
Xiaolong
>
>Xiaolong, Thorsten
>
>Could you help to test these patches?
>
>Thanks,
>
>>
>> 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
>>>>
>>
>> .
>>
>
