linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: -27% netperf TCP_STREAM regression by "tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol"
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2013 02:43:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a9i0l3v1.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131023061019.GA15698@localhost> (Fengguang Wu's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2013 07:10:19 +0100")

Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:38:10PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:
>> 
>> > From: fengguang.wu@intel.com
>> > Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 22:41:29 +0100
>> >
>> >> We noticed big netperf throughput regressions
>> >> 
>> >>     a4fe34bf902b8f709c63      2e685cad57906e19add7  
>> >> ------------------------  ------------------------  
>> >>                   707.40       -40.7%       419.60  lkp-nex04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>> >>                  2775.60       -23.7%      2116.40  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>> >>                  3483.00       -27.2%      2536.00  TOTAL netperf.Throughput_Mbps
>> >> 
>> >> and bisected it to
>> >> 
>> >> commit 2e685cad57906e19add7189b5ff49dfb6aaa21d3
>> >> Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
>> >> Date:   Sat Oct 19 16:26:19 2013 -0700
>> >> 
>> >>     tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol
>> >
>> > Eric please look into this, I'd rather have a fix to apply than revert your
>> > work.
>> 
>> Will do I expect some ordering changed, and that changed the cache line
>> behavior.
>> 
>> If I can't find anything we can revert this one particular patch without
>> affecting anything else, but it would be nice to keep the data structure
>> smaller.
>> 
>> Fengguag what would I need to do to reproduce this?
>
> Eric, attached is the kernel config.
>
> We used these commands in the test:
>
>         netserver
>         netperf -t TCP_STREAM -c -C -l 120      # repeat 64 times and get average
>
> btw, we've got more complete change set (attached) and also noticed
> performance increase in the TCP_SENDFILE case:
>
>     a4fe34bf902b8f709c63      2e685cad57906e19add7
> ------------------------  ------------------------
>                   707.40       -40.7%       419.60  lkp-nex04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  2572.20       -17.7%      2116.20  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_MAERTS
>                  2775.60       -23.7%      2116.40  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  1006.60       -54.4%       459.40  lkp-sbx04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  3278.60       -25.2%      2453.80  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_MAERTS
>                  1902.80       +21.7%      2315.00  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_SENDFILE
>                  3345.40       -26.7%      2451.00  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                 15588.60       -20.9%     12331.40  TOTAL netperf.Throughput_Mbps

I have a second question.  Do you mount the cgroup filesystem?  Do you
set memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes?

If you aren't setting any memory cgroup limits or creating any groups
this change should not have had any effect whatsoever.  And you haven't
mentioned it so I don't expect you are enabling the memory cgroup limits
explicitly.

If you have enabled the memory cgroups can you please describe your
configuration as that may play a significant role.

Eric

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-10-23  9:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-22 21:41 -27% netperf TCP_STREAM regression by "tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol" fengguang.wu
2013-10-22 22:00 ` David Miller
2013-10-23  4:38   ` Eric W. Biederman
     [not found]     ` <20131023061019.GA15698@localhost>
2013-10-23  9:43       ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2013-10-23 11:46         ` Fengguang Wu
2013-10-23 12:25     ` Christoph Paasch
2013-10-23 13:02       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-10-23 19:55         ` [PATCH] Fix: Dereference pointer-value of sk_prot->memory_pressure Eric W. Biederman
2013-10-23 20:15           ` David Miller
2013-10-23 19:58         ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-10-23 22:07       ` -27% netperf TCP_STREAM regression by "tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol" Fengguang Wu

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=87a9i0l3v1.fsf@xmission.com \
    --to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).