lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 13 May 2009 10:58:39 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@...i.umich.edu>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.30-rc deadline scheduler performance regression for iozone over NFS

Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:

> (obvious cc's added...)
>
> It's an iozone performance regression.
>
> On Tue, 12 May 2009 23:29:30 -0400 Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Mon, May 11 2009, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> >> Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> writes:
>> >> 
>> >> > On Fri, May 08 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 10:01:58 -0400
>> >> >> Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> wrote:
>> >> >> 
>> >> >> > Hi,
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > I've been working on CFQ improvements for interleaved I/Os between
>> >> >> > processes, and noticed a regression in performance when using the
>> >> >> > deadline I/O scheduler.  The test uses a server configured with a cciss
>> >> >> > array and 1Gb/s ethernet.
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > The iozone command line was:
>> >> >> >   iozone -s 2000000 -r 64 -f /mnt/test/testfile -i 1 -w
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > The numbers in the nfsd's row represent the number of nfsd "threads".
>> >> >> > These numbers (in MB/s) represent the average of 5 runs.
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >                v2.6.29
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > nfsd's  |   1    |  2   |   4   |   8
>> >> >> > --------+---------------+-------+------
>> >> >> > deadline| 43207 | 67436 | 96289 | 107590
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >               2.6.30-rc1
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > nfsd's  |   1   |   2   |   4   |   8
>> >> >> > --------+---------------+-------+------
>> >> >> > deadline| 43732 | 68059 | 76659 | 83231
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> >     2.6.30-rc3.block-for-linus
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > nfsd's  |   1   |   2   |   4   |   8
>> >> >> > --------+---------------+-------+------
>> >> >> > deadline| 46102 | 71151 | 83120 | 82330
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > 
>> >> >> > Notice the drop for 4 and 8 threads.  It may be worth noting that the
>> >> >> > default number of NFSD threads is 8.

Just following up with numbers:

  2.6.30-rc4

nfsd's  |   8
--------+------
cfq     | 51632   (49791 52436 52308 51488 52141)
deadline| 65558   (41675 42559 74820 87518 81221)

   2.6.30-rc4 reverting the sunrpc "fix"

nfsd's  |   8
--------+------
cfq     |  82513  (81650 82762 83147 82935 82073)
deadline| 107827  (109730 106077 107175 108524 107632)

The numbers in parenthesis are the individual runs.  Notice how
2.6.30-rc4 has some pretty wide variations for deadline.

Cheers,
Jeff

>> >> >> I guess we should ask Rafael to add this to the post-2.6.29 regression
>> >> >> list.
>> >> >
>> >> > I agree. It'd be nice to bisect this one down, I'm guessing some mm
>> >> > change has caused this writeout regression.
>> >> 
>> >> It's not writeout, it's a read test.
>> >
>> > Doh sorry, I even ran these tests as well a few weeks back. So perhaps
>> > some read-ahead change, I didn't look into it. FWIW, on a single SATA
>> > drive here, it didn't show any difference.
>> 
>> OK, I bisected this to the following commit.  The mount is done using
>> NFSv3, by the way.
>> 
>> commit 47a14ef1af48c696b214ac168f056ddc79793d0e
>> Author: Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@...i.umich.edu>
>> Date:   Tue Oct 21 14:13:47 2008 -0400
>> 
>>     svcrpc: take advantage of tcp autotuning
>>     
>>     Allow the NFSv4 server to make use of TCP autotuning behaviour, which
>>     was previously disabled by setting the sk_userlocks variable.
>>     
>>     Set the receive buffers to be big enough to receive the whole RPC
>>     request, and set this for the listening socket, not the accept socket.
>>     
>>     Remove the code that readjusts the receive/send buffer sizes for the
>>     accepted socket. Previously this code was used to influence the TCP
>>     window management behaviour, which is no longer needed when autotuning
>>     is enabled.
>>     
>>     This can improve IO bandwidth on networks with high bandwidth-delay
>>     products, where a large tcp window is required.  It also simplifies
>>     performance tuning, since getting adequate tcp buffers previously
>>     required increasing the number of nfsd threads.
>>     
>>     Signed-off-by: Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@...i.umich.edu>
>>     Cc: Jim Rees <rees@...ch.edu>
>>     Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@...i.umich.edu>
>> 
>> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
>> index 5763e64..7a2a90f 100644
>> --- a/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
>> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svcsock.c
>> @@ -345,7 +345,6 @@ static void svc_sock_setbufsize(struct socket *sock, unsigned int snd,
>>  	lock_sock(sock->sk);
>>  	sock->sk->sk_sndbuf = snd * 2;
>>  	sock->sk->sk_rcvbuf = rcv * 2;
>> -	sock->sk->sk_userlocks |= SOCK_SNDBUF_LOCK|SOCK_RCVBUF_LOCK;
>>  	release_sock(sock->sk);
>>  #endif
>>  }
>> @@ -797,23 +796,6 @@ static int svc_tcp_recvfrom(struct svc_rqst *rqstp)
>>  		test_bit(XPT_CONN, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags),
>>  		test_bit(XPT_CLOSE, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags));
>>  
>> -	if (test_and_clear_bit(XPT_CHNGBUF, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags))
>> -		/* sndbuf needs to have room for one request
>> -		 * per thread, otherwise we can stall even when the
>> -		 * network isn't a bottleneck.
>> -		 *
>> -		 * We count all threads rather than threads in a
>> -		 * particular pool, which provides an upper bound
>> -		 * on the number of threads which will access the socket.
>> -		 *
>> -		 * rcvbuf just needs to be able to hold a few requests.
>> -		 * Normally they will be removed from the queue
>> -		 * as soon a a complete request arrives.
>> -		 */
>> -		svc_sock_setbufsize(svsk->sk_sock,
>> -				    (serv->sv_nrthreads+3) * serv->sv_max_mesg,
>> -				    3 * serv->sv_max_mesg);
>> -
>>  	clear_bit(XPT_DATA, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
>>  
>>  	/* Receive data. If we haven't got the record length yet, get
>> @@ -1061,15 +1043,6 @@ static void svc_tcp_init(struct svc_sock *svsk, struct svc_serv *serv)
>>  
>>  		tcp_sk(sk)->nonagle |= TCP_NAGLE_OFF;
>>  
>> -		/* initialise setting must have enough space to
>> -		 * receive and respond to one request.
>> -		 * svc_tcp_recvfrom will re-adjust if necessary
>> -		 */
>> -		svc_sock_setbufsize(svsk->sk_sock,
>> -				    3 * svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_server->sv_max_mesg,
>> -				    3 * svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_server->sv_max_mesg);
>> -
>> -		set_bit(XPT_CHNGBUF, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
>>  		set_bit(XPT_DATA, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
>>  		if (sk->sk_state != TCP_ESTABLISHED)
>>  			set_bit(XPT_CLOSE, &svsk->sk_xprt.xpt_flags);
>> @@ -1140,8 +1113,14 @@ static struct svc_sock *svc_setup_socket(struct svc_serv *serv,
>>  	/* Initialize the socket */
>>  	if (sock->type == SOCK_DGRAM)
>>  		svc_udp_init(svsk, serv);
>> -	else
>> +	else {
>> +		/* initialise setting must have enough space to
>> +		 * receive and respond to one request.
>> +		 */
>> +		svc_sock_setbufsize(svsk->sk_sock, 4 * serv->sv_max_mesg,
>> +					4 * serv->sv_max_mesg);
>>  		svc_tcp_init(svsk, serv);
>> +	}
>>  
>>  	/*
>>  	 * We start one listener per sv_serv.  We want AF_INET
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ