From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f71.google.com (mail-lf0-f71.google.com [209.85.215.71]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 944756B0261 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 05:18:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-lf0-f71.google.com with SMTP id p85so10469586lfg.3 for ; Wed, 27 Jul 2016 02:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rp02.intra2net.com (rp02.intra2net.com. [62.75.181.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id k6si5966589wjy.153.2016.07.27.02.18.39 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 27 Jul 2016 02:18:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Jarosch Subject: Re: Re: [Bug 64121] New: [BISECTED] "mm" performance regression updating from 3.2 to 3.3 Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 11:18:36 +0200 Message-ID: <1650204.9z6KOJWgNh@storm> In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Vlastimil Babka Cc: Johannes Weiner , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Thursday, 21. July 2016 16:02:06 Vlastimil Babka wrote: > > recently we've updated our production mail server from 3.14.69 > > to 3.14.73 and it worked fine for a few days. When the box is really > > busy (=incoming malware via email), the I/O speed drops to crawl, > > I don't see anything either, might be some change e.g. under fs/ though. > How about git bisect? One day later I failed to trigger it, so no easy git bisect. Yesterday another busy mail server showed the same problem during backup creation. This time I knew about slabtop and could see that the ext4_inode_cache occupied about 393MB of the 776MB total low memory. Write speed was down to 25 MB/s. "sysctl -w vm.drop_caches=3" cleared the inode cache and the write speed was back to 300 MB/s. It might be related to memory fragmentation of low memory due to the inode cache, the mail server has over 1.400.000 millions files. I suspect the problem is unrelated to 3.14.73 per se, it seems to trigger depending how busy the machine is and the memory layout. A 64 bit kernel (even with a 32 bit userspace) is the proper solution here. Still that would mean to deprecate working 32 bit only boxes. Cheers, Thomas -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org