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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77BE2C25B0E for ; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 11:13:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230293AbiHLLN3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 07:13:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50040 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234039AbiHLLN1 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Aug 2022 07:13:27 -0400 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90FF7A50FF; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 04:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fraeml740-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.147.206]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4M41Hw6dQ3z67xgN; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 19:13:16 +0800 (CST) Received: from lhrpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.67) by fraeml740-chm.china.huawei.com (10.206.15.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 13:13:23 +0200 Received: from [10.48.157.254] (10.48.157.254) by lhrpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.67) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2375.24; Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:13:21 +0100 Message-ID: <2e9cf5a6-c043-5ccf-e363-097c6c941891@huawei.com> Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:13:20 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.1 Subject: Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec -15.0% regression To: Oliver Sang , Damien Le Moal CC: Christoph Hellwig , "Martin K. Petersen" , LKML , "Linux Memory Management List" , , , , , , , References: <1f498d4a-f93f-ceb4-b713-753196e5e08d@opensource.wdc.com> <3451fa5a-6229-073f-ae18-0c232cd48ed5@huawei.com> From: John Garry In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.48.157.254] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.191.163.240) To lhrpeml500003.china.huawei.com (7.191.162.67) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On 12/08/2022 06:01, Oliver Sang wrote: > hi, Damien Le Moal, > > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 07:55:53AM -0700, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 2022/08/09 2:58, John Garry wrote: >>> On 08/08/2022 15:52, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>>> On 2022/08/05 1:05, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Greeting, >>>>> >>>>> FYI, we noticed a -15.0% regression of stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec due to commit: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> commit: 0568e6122574dcc1aded2979cd0245038efe22b6 ("ata: libata-scsi: cap ata_device->max_sectors according to shost->max_sectors") >>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master >>>>> >>>>> in testcase: stress-ng >>>>> on test machine: 96 threads 2 sockets Ice Lake with 256G memory >>>>> with following parameters: >>>>> >>>>> nr_threads: 10% >>>>> disk: 1HDD >>>>> testtime: 60s >>>>> fs: f2fs >>>>> class: filesystem >>>>> test: copy-file >>>>> cpufreq_governor: performance >>>>> ucode: 0xb000280 >>>> >>>> Without knowing what the device adapter is, hard to say where the problem is. I >>>> suspect that with the patch applied, we may be ending up with a small default >>>> max_sectors value, causing overhead due to more commands than necessary. >>>> >>>> Will check what I see with my test rig. >>> >>> As far as I can see, this patch should not make a difference unless the >>> ATA shost driver is setting the max_sectors value unnecessarily low. >> >> That is my hunch too, hence my question about which host driver is being used >> for this test... That is not apparent from the problem report. > > we noticed the commit is already in mainline now, and in our tests, there is > still similar regression and also on other platforms. > could you guide us how to check "which host driver is being used for this > test"? hope to supply some useful information. > For me, a complete kernel log may help. >> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag >>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Details are as below: >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To reproduce: >>>>> >>>>> git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git >>>>> cd lkp-tests >>>>> sudo bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email >>>>> bin/lkp split-job --compatible job.yaml # generate the yaml file for lkp run >>>>> sudo bin/lkp run generated-yaml-file >>>>> >>>>> # if come across any failure that blocks the test, >>>>> # please remove ~/.lkp and /lkp dir to run from a clean state. >>>>> >>>>> ========================================================================================= >>>>> class/compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/fs/kconfig/nr_threads/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase/testtime/ucode: >>>>> filesystem/gcc-11/performance/1HDD/f2fs/x86_64-rhel-8.3/10%/debian-11.1-x86_64-20220510.cgz/lkp-icl-2sp1/copy-file/stress-ng/60s/0xb000280 >>>>> >>>>> commit: >>>>> 4cbfca5f77 ("scsi: scsi_transport_sas: cap shost opt_sectors according to DMA optimal limit") >>>>> 0568e61225 ("ata: libata-scsi: cap ata_device->max_sectors according to shost->max_sectors") >>>>> >>>>> 4cbfca5f7750520f 0568e6122574dcc1aded2979cd0 >>>>> ---------------- --------------------------- >>>>> %stddev %change %stddev >>>>> \ | \ >>>>> 1627 -14.9% 1385 stress-ng.copy-file.ops >>>>> 27.01 -15.0% 22.96 stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec >>>>> 8935079 -11.9% 7870629 stress-ng.time.file_system_outputs >>>>> 14.88 ± 5% -31.8% 10.14 ± 3% stress-ng.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got >>>>> 50912 -14.7% 43413 vmstat.io.bo >>>>> 93.78 +1.4% 95.10 iostat.cpu.idle >>>>> 3.89 -31.6% 2.66 iostat.cpu.iowait >>>>> 4.01 -1.3 2.74 mpstat.cpu.all.iowait% >>>>> 0.23 ± 9% -0.1 0.17 ± 11% mpstat.cpu.all.sys% >>>>> 1.66 ± 37% -1.2 0.51 ± 55% perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.f2fs_write_end.generic_perform_write.f2fs_buffered_write_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.do_iter_readv_writev >>>>> 1.66 ± 37% -1.1 0.59 ± 25% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_write_end >>>>> 1.51 ± 40% -1.1 0.45 ± 26% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_dirty_data_folio >>>>> 1.21 ± 49% -1.0 0.23 ± 33% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_update_dirty_folio >>>>> 0.88 ± 56% -0.8 0.04 ±111% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath >>>>> 0.14 ± 26% +0.1 0.25 ± 28% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.page_cache_ra_unbounded >>>>> 0.88 ± 56% -0.8 0.04 ±112% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath >>>>> 3164876 ± 9% -20.2% 2524713 ± 7% perf-stat.i.cache-misses >>>>> 4.087e+08 -4.6% 3.899e+08 perf-stat.i.dTLB-loads >>>>> 313050 ± 10% -18.4% 255410 ± 6% perf-stat.i.node-loads >>>>> 972573 ± 9% -16.4% 812873 ± 6% perf-stat.i.node-stores >>>>> 3114748 ± 9% -20.2% 2484807 ± 7% perf-stat.ps.cache-misses >>>>> 4.022e+08 -4.6% 3.837e+08 perf-stat.ps.dTLB-loads >>>>> 308178 ± 10% -18.4% 251418 ± 6% perf-stat.ps.node-loads >>>>> 956996 ± 9% -16.4% 799948 ± 6% perf-stat.ps.node-stores >>>>> 358486 -8.3% 328694 proc-vmstat.nr_active_file >>>>> 1121620 -11.9% 987816 proc-vmstat.nr_dirtied >>>>> 179906 -6.7% 167912 proc-vmstat.nr_dirty >>>>> 1151201 -1.7% 1131322 proc-vmstat.nr_file_pages >>>>> 100181 +9.9% 110078 ± 2% proc-vmstat.nr_inactive_file >>>>> 846362 -14.6% 722471 proc-vmstat.nr_written >>>>> 358486 -8.3% 328694 proc-vmstat.nr_zone_active_file >>>>> 100181 +9.9% 110078 ± 2% proc-vmstat.nr_zone_inactive_file >>>>> 180668 -6.8% 168456 proc-vmstat.nr_zone_write_pending >>>>> 556469 -3.5% 536985 proc-vmstat.pgactivate >>>>> 3385454 -14.6% 2889953 proc-vmstat.pgpgout >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Damien Le Moal >> Western Digital Research > . From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6285347433301498257==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: John Garry To: lkp@lists.01.org Subject: Re: [ata] 0568e61225: stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_sec -15.0% regression Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2022 12:13:20 +0100 Message-ID: <2e9cf5a6-c043-5ccf-e363-097c6c941891@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: --===============6285347433301498257== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12/08/2022 06:01, Oliver Sang wrote: > hi, Damien Le Moal, > = > On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 07:55:53AM -0700, Damien Le Moal wrote: >> On 2022/08/09 2:58, John Garry wrote: >>> On 08/08/2022 15:52, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>>> On 2022/08/05 1:05, kernel test robot wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Greeting, >>>>> >>>>> FYI, we noticed a -15.0% regression of stress-ng.copy-file.ops_per_se= c due to commit: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> commit: 0568e6122574dcc1aded2979cd0245038efe22b6 ("ata: libata-scsi: = cap ata_device->max_sectors according to shost->max_sectors") >>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git mast= er >>>>> >>>>> in testcase: stress-ng >>>>> on test machine: 96 threads 2 sockets Ice Lake with 256G memory >>>>> with following parameters: >>>>> >>>>> nr_threads: 10% >>>>> disk: 1HDD >>>>> testtime: 60s >>>>> fs: f2fs >>>>> class: filesystem >>>>> test: copy-file >>>>> cpufreq_governor: performance >>>>> ucode: 0xb000280 >>>> >>>> Without knowing what the device adapter is, hard to say where the prob= lem is. I >>>> suspect that with the patch applied, we may be ending up with a small = default >>>> max_sectors value, causing overhead due to more commands than necessar= y. >>>> >>>> Will check what I see with my test rig. >>> >>> As far as I can see, this patch should not make a difference unless the >>> ATA shost driver is setting the max_sectors value unnecessarily low. >> >> That is my hunch too, hence my question about which host driver is being= used >> for this test... That is not apparent from the problem report. > = > we noticed the commit is already in mainline now, and in our tests, there= is > still similar regression and also on other platforms. > could you guide us how to check "which host driver is being used for this > test"? hope to supply some useful information. > = For me, a complete kernel log may help. >> >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag >>>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Details are as below: >>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------= -----------------------------> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To reproduce: >>>>> >>>>> git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git >>>>> cd lkp-tests >>>>> sudo bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attac= hed in this email >>>>> bin/lkp split-job --compatible job.yaml # generate the yaml= file for lkp run >>>>> sudo bin/lkp run generated-yaml-file >>>>> >>>>> # if come across any failure that blocks the test, >>>>> # please remove ~/.lkp and /lkp dir to run from a clean sta= te. >>>>> >>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >>>>> class/compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/fs/kconfig/nr_threads/rootfs/tbo= x_group/test/testcase/testtime/ucode: >>>>> filesystem/gcc-11/performance/1HDD/f2fs/x86_64-rhel-8.3/10%/debia= n-11.1-x86_64-20220510.cgz/lkp-icl-2sp1/copy-file/stress-ng/60s/0xb000280 >>>>> >>>>> commit: >>>>> 4cbfca5f77 ("scsi: scsi_transport_sas: cap shost opt_sectors acco= rding to DMA optimal limit") >>>>> 0568e61225 ("ata: libata-scsi: cap ata_device->max_sectors accord= ing to shost->max_sectors") >>>>> >>>>> 4cbfca5f7750520f 0568e6122574dcc1aded2979cd0 >>>>> ---------------- --------------------------- >>>>> %stddev %change %stddev >>>>> \ | \ >>>>> 1627 -14.9% 1385 stress-ng.copy-file.o= ps >>>>> 27.01 -15.0% 22.96 stress-ng.copy-file.o= ps_per_sec >>>>> 8935079 -11.9% 7870629 stress-ng.time.file_s= ystem_outputs >>>>> 14.88 =C2=B1 5% -31.8% 10.14 =C2=B1 3% stress-ng.t= ime.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got >>>>> 50912 -14.7% 43413 vmstat.io.bo >>>>> 93.78 +1.4% 95.10 iostat.cpu.idle >>>>> 3.89 -31.6% 2.66 iostat.cpu.iowait >>>>> 4.01 -1.3 2.74 mpstat.cpu.all.iowait% >>>>> 0.23 =C2=B1 9% -0.1 0.17 =C2=B1 11% mpstat.cpu.= all.sys% >>>>> 1.66 =C2=B1 37% -1.2 0.51 =C2=B1 55% perf-profil= e.calltrace.cycles-pp.f2fs_write_end.generic_perform_write.f2fs_buffered_wr= ite_iter.f2fs_file_write_iter.do_iter_readv_writev >>>>> 1.66 =C2=B1 37% -1.1 0.59 =C2=B1 25% perf-profil= e.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_write_end >>>>> 1.51 =C2=B1 40% -1.1 0.45 =C2=B1 26% perf-profil= e.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_dirty_data_folio >>>>> 1.21 =C2=B1 49% -1.0 0.23 =C2=B1 33% perf-profil= e.children.cycles-pp.f2fs_update_dirty_folio >>>>> 0.88 =C2=B1 56% -0.8 0.04 =C2=B1111% perf-profil= e.children.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath >>>>> 0.14 =C2=B1 26% +0.1 0.25 =C2=B1 28% perf-profil= e.children.cycles-pp.page_cache_ra_unbounded >>>>> 0.88 =C2=B1 56% -0.8 0.04 =C2=B1112% perf-profil= e.self.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath >>>>> 3164876 =C2=B1 9% -20.2% 2524713 =C2=B1 7% perf-stat.i= .cache-misses >>>>> 4.087e+08 -4.6% 3.899e+08 perf-stat.i.dTLB-loads >>>>> 313050 =C2=B1 10% -18.4% 255410 =C2=B1 6% perf-stat.i= .node-loads >>>>> 972573 =C2=B1 9% -16.4% 812873 =C2=B1 6% perf-stat.i= .node-stores >>>>> 3114748 =C2=B1 9% -20.2% 2484807 =C2=B1 7% perf-stat.p= s.cache-misses >>>>> 4.022e+08 -4.6% 3.837e+08 perf-stat.ps.dTLB-loa= ds >>>>> 308178 =C2=B1 10% -18.4% 251418 =C2=B1 6% perf-stat.p= s.node-loads >>>>> 956996 =C2=B1 9% -16.4% 799948 =C2=B1 6% perf-stat.p= s.node-stores >>>>> 358486 -8.3% 328694 proc-vmstat.nr_active= _file >>>>> 1121620 -11.9% 987816 proc-vmstat.nr_dirtied >>>>> 179906 -6.7% 167912 proc-vmstat.nr_dirty >>>>> 1151201 -1.7% 1131322 proc-vmstat.nr_file_p= ages >>>>> 100181 +9.9% 110078 =C2=B1 2% proc-vmstat.nr_i= nactive_file >>>>> 846362 -14.6% 722471 proc-vmstat.nr_written >>>>> 358486 -8.3% 328694 proc-vmstat.nr_zone_a= ctive_file >>>>> 100181 +9.9% 110078 =C2=B1 2% proc-vmstat.nr_z= one_inactive_file >>>>> 180668 -6.8% 168456 proc-vmstat.nr_zone_w= rite_pending >>>>> 556469 -3.5% 536985 proc-vmstat.pgactivate >>>>> 3385454 -14.6% 2889953 proc-vmstat.pgpgout >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- = >> Damien Le Moal >> Western Digital Research > . --===============6285347433301498257==--