From: Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@kernel.org>
To: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com>,
lkp@01.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [LKP] [lkp] [f2fs] ec795418c4: fsmark.files_per_sec -36.3% regression
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 10:24:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160804172452.GA12093@jaegeuk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87bn18cvuu.fsf_-_@yhuang-mobile.sh.intel.com>
Hi Huang,
On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 10:00:41AM -0700, Huang, Ying wrote:
> Hi, Jaegeuk,
>
> "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com> writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I checked the comparison result below and found this is a regression for
> > fsmark.files_per_sec, not fsmark.app_overhead.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Huang, Ying
> >
> > kernel test robot <xiaolong.ye@intel.com> writes:
> >
> >> FYI, we noticed a -36.3% regression of fsmark.files_per_sec due to commit:
> >>
> >> commit ec795418c41850056feb956534edf059dc1155d4 ("f2fs: use percpu_rw_semaphore")
> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs.git dev-test
>
> I found this has been merged by upstream. Do you have some plan to fix
> it? Or you think the test itself has some problem?
Sorry, too busy to take a look at this.
The patch implements percpu_rw_semaphore which is intended to enhance FS
scalability. Since I couldn't see any big regression in my test cases, could you
check any debugging options which may give some overheads?
Let me recheck this with whole my tests.
Thanks,
>
> We have another 2 regressions
>
> - [lkp] [f2fs] 3bdad3c7ee: aim7.jobs-per-min -25.3% regression
> - [lkp] [f2fs] b93f771286: aim7.jobs-per-min -81.2% regression
>
> they are merged by upstream now too. So same questions for them too.
>
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying
>
> >> in testcase: fsmark
> >> on test machine: 72 threads Haswell-EP with 128G memory
> >> with following parameters:
> > cpufreq_governor=performance/disk=1SSD/filesize=8K/fs=f2fs/iterations=8/nr_directories=16d/nr_files_per_directory=256fpd/nr_threads=4/sync_method=fsyncBeforeClose/test_size=72G
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-04 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-18 2:09 [lkp] [f2fs] ec795418c4: fsmark.app_overhead -36.3% regression kernel test robot
2016-07-18 20:27 ` [LKP] " Huang, Ying
2016-08-04 17:00 ` [LKP] [lkp] [f2fs] ec795418c4: fsmark.files_per_sec " Huang, Ying
2016-08-04 17:24 ` Jaegeuk Kim [this message]
2016-08-04 17:44 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-04 18:52 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-08-04 20:36 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-11 22:49 ` Huang, Ying
2016-08-12 1:22 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-08-24 16:51 ` huang ying
2016-08-27 0:52 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-08-27 2:13 ` Fengguang Wu
2016-08-30 2:30 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-08-30 16:44 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-26 6:26 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-26 18:23 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-09-27 0:50 ` Huang, Ying
2016-09-27 1:41 ` Jaegeuk Kim
2016-10-31 3:14 ` Huang, Ying
2016-10-31 17:42 ` Jaegeuk Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160804172452.GA12093@jaegeuk \
--to=jaegeuk@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@01.org \
--cc=xiaolong.ye@intel.com \
--cc=ying.huang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).