linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.30-rc deadline scheduler performance regression for iozone over NFS

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <x49octv7qr8.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 May 2009 09:34:03 -0400
From:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	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

Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no> writes:

> On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 15:29 -0400, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>> Hi, netdev folks.  The summary here is:
>> 
>> A patch added in the 2.6.30 development cycle caused a performance
>> regression in my NFS iozone testing.  The patch in question is the
>> following:
>> 
>> commit 47a14ef1af48c696b214ac168f056ddc79793d0e
>> Author: Olga Kornievskaia <aglo@...i.umich.edu>
>> Date:   Tue Oct 21 14:13:47 2008 -0400
>> 
>>     svcrpc: take advantage of tcp autotuning
>>  
>> which is also quoted below.  Using 8 nfsd threads, a single client doing
>> 2GB of streaming read I/O goes from 107590 KB/s under 2.6.29 to 65558
>> KB/s under 2.6.30-rc4.  I also see more run to run variation under
>> 2.6.30-rc4 using the deadline I/O scheduler on the server.  That
>> variation disappears (as does the performance regression) when reverting
>> the above commit.
>
> It looks to me as if we've got a bug in the svc_tcp_has_wspace() helper
> function. I can see no reason why we should stop processing new incoming
> RPC requests just because the send buffer happens to be 2/3 full. If we
> see that we have space for another reply, then we should just go for it.
> OTOH, we do want to ensure that the SOCK_NOSPACE flag remains set, so
> that the TCP layer knows that we're congested, and that we'd like it to
> increase the send window size, please.
>
> Could you therefore please see if the following (untested) patch helps?

I'm seeing slightly better results with the patch:

71548
75987
71557
87432
83538

But that's still not up to the speeds we saw under 2.6.29.  The packet
capture for one run can be found here:
  http://people.redhat.com/jmoyer/trond.pcap.bz2

Cheers,
Jeff
--
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/