| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <dcc72d34-89e1-6181-3556-a1a981256cc6@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 11:31:39 +0800
From: Zhang Yi <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
CC: <oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev>, <lkp@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
<linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, <ying.huang@...el.com>, <feng.tang@...el.com>,
<fengwei.yin@...el.com>, <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [jbd2] 6a3afb6ac6: fileio.latency_95th_ms 92.5%
regression
On 2024/1/2 15:31, kernel test robot wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> kernel test robot noticed a 92.5% regression of fileio.latency_95th_ms on:
Hello,
This seems a little weird, the tests doesn't use blk-cgroup, and the patch
increase IO priority in WBT, so there shouldn't be any negative influence in
theory. I've tested sysbench on my machine with Intel Xeon Gold 6240 CPU,
400GB memory with HDD disk, and couldn't reproduce this regression.
==
Without 6a3afb6ac6 ("jbd2: increase the journal IO's priority")
==
$ sysbench fileio --events=0 --threads=128 --time=600 --file-test-mode=seqwr --file-total-size=68719476736 --file-io-mode=sync --file-num=1024 run
sysbench 1.1.0-df89d34 (using bundled LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)
Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 128
Initializing random number generator from current time
Extra file open flags: (none)
1024 files, 64MiB each
64GiB total file size
Block size 16KiB
Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests.
Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled.
Using synchronous I/O mode
Doing sequential write (creation) test
Initializing worker threads...
Threads started!
Throughput:
read: IOPS=0.00 0.00 MiB/s (0.00 MB/s)
write: IOPS=31961.19 499.39 MiB/s (523.65 MB/s)
fsync: IOPS=327500.24
Latency (ms):
min: 0.00
avg: 0.33
max: 920.89
95th percentile: 0.33
sum: 71212319.19
==
With 6a3afb6ac6 ("jbd2: increase the journal IO's priority")
==
$ sysbench fileio --events=0 --threads=128 --time=600 --file-test-mode=seqwr --file-total-size=68719476736 --file-io-mode=sync --file-num=1024 run
sysbench 1.1.0-df89d34 (using bundled LuaJIT 2.1.0-beta3)
Running the test with following options:
Number of threads: 128
Initializing random number generator from current time
Extra file open flags: (none)
1024 files, 64MiB each
64GiB total file size
Block size 16KiB
Periodic FSYNC enabled, calling fsync() each 100 requests.
Calling fsync() at the end of test, Enabled.
Using synchronous I/O mode
Doing sequential write (creation) test
Initializing worker threads...
Threads started!
Throughput:
read: IOPS=0.00 0.00 MiB/s (0.00 MB/s)
write: IOPS=31710.38 495.47 MiB/s (519.54 MB/s)
fsync: IOPS=324931.88
Latency (ms):
min: 0.00
avg: 0.33
max: 1051.69
95th percentile: 0.32
sum: 71309894.62
Thanks,
Yi.
>
>
> commit: 6a3afb6ac6dfab158ebdd4b87941178f58c8939f ("jbd2: increase the journal IO's priority")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>
> testcase: fileio
> test machine: 128 threads 2 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8358 CPU @ 2.60GHz (Ice Lake) with 128G memory
> parameters:
>
> period: 600s
> nr_threads: 100%
> disk: 1HDD
> fs: ext4
> size: 64G
> filenum: 1024f
> rwmode: seqwr
> iomode: sync
> cpufreq_governor: performance
>
>
>
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202401021525.a27b9444-oliver.sang@intel.com
>
>
> Details are as below:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>
>
> The kernel config and materials to reproduce are available at:
> https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240102/202401021525.a27b9444-oliver.sang@intel.com
>
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/filenum/fs/iomode/kconfig/nr_threads/period/rootfs/rwmode/size/tbox_group/testcase:
> gcc-12/performance/1HDD/1024f/ext4/sync/x86_64-rhel-8.3/100%/600s/debian-11.1-x86_64-20220510.cgz/seqwr/64G/lkp-icl-2sp5/fileio
>
> commit:
> 8555922721 ("jbd2: correct the printing of write_flags in jbd2_write_superblock()")
> 6a3afb6ac6 ("jbd2: increase the journal IO's priority")
>
> 85559227211020b2 6a3afb6ac6dfab158ebdd4b8794
> ---------------- ---------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 37.99 ± 9% +92.5% 73.13 fileio.latency_95th_ms
> 19872 ± 16% -24.1% 15078 ± 21% numa-meminfo.node1.Active(file)
> 24.74 ± 6% +97.3% 48.81 ± 2% perf-sched.wait_time.avg.ms.kjournald2.kthread.ret_from_fork.ret_from_fork_asm
> 8157448 -5.7% 7691858 ± 2% proc-vmstat.pgpgout
> 13464 -5.7% 12700 ± 2% vmstat.io.bo
> 4968 ± 16% -24.1% 3768 ± 21% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_active_file
> 4968 ± 16% -24.1% 3768 ± 21% numa-vmstat.node1.nr_zone_active_file
> 1413 +2.8% 1452 ± 2% perf-stat.i.cycles-between-cache-misses
> 1.59 -2.9% 1.54 perf-stat.overall.MPKI
> 1368 +2.5% 1402 perf-stat.overall.cycles-between-cache-misses
> 161.13 ± 9% +17.4% 189.23 ± 10% sched_debug.cpu.curr->pid.avg
> 25531 ± 6% -12.4% 22376 ± 8% sched_debug.cpu.nr_switches.stddev
> -93.66 +38.8% -130.00 sched_debug.cpu.nr_uninterruptible.min
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists