| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 19:35:31 -0800
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
"Jason Gunthorpe" <jgg@...pe.ca>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <lkp@...ts.01.org>,
<lkp@...el.com>, <ying.huang@...el.com>, <feng.tang@...el.com>,
<zhengjun.xing@...el.com>, <guobing.chen@...el.com>,
<ming.a.chen@...el.com>, <frank.du@...el.com>,
<Shuhua.Fan@...el.com>, <wangyang.guo@...el.com>,
<Wenhuan.Huang@...el.com>, <jessica.ji@...el.com>,
<shan.kang@...el.com>, <guangli.li@...el.com>,
<tiejun.li@...el.com>, <yu.ma@...el.com>, <dapeng1.mi@...el.com>,
<jiebin.sun@...el.com>, <gengxin.xie@...el.com>,
<fan.zhao@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [mm/gup] 47e29d32af: phoronix-test-suite.npb.FT.A.total_mop_s
-45.0% regression
On 11/16/20 6:48 PM, kernel test robot wrote:
>
> Greeting,
>
> FYI, we noticed a -45.0% regression of phoronix-test-suite.npb.FT.A.total_mop_s due to commit:
>
That's a huge slowdown...
>
> commit: 47e29d32afba11b13efb51f03154a8cf22fb4360 ("mm/gup: page->hpage_pinned_refcount: exact pin counts for huge pages")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
...but that commit happened in April, 2020. Surely if this were a serious issue we
would have some other indication...is this worth following up on?? I'm inclined to
ignore it, honestly.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
>
>
> in testcase: phoronix-test-suite
> on test machine: 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz with 192G memory
> with following parameters:
>
> test: npb-1.3.1
> option_a: FT.A
> cpufreq_governor: performance
> ucode: 0x5002f01
>
> test-description: The Phoronix Test Suite is the most comprehensive testing and benchmarking platform available that provides an extensible framework for which new tests can be easily added.
> test-url: http://www.phoronix-test-suite.com/
>
>
>
> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
>
>
> Details are as below:
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->
>
>
> To reproduce:
>
> git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git
> cd lkp-tests
> bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
> bin/lkp run job.yaml
>
> =========================================================================================
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/option_a/rootfs/tbox_group/test/testcase/ucode:
> gcc-9/performance/x86_64-rhel-8.3/FT.A/debian-x86_64-phoronix/lkp-csl-2sp8/npb-1.3.1/phoronix-test-suite/0x5002f01
>
> commit:
> 3faa52c03f ("mm/gup: track FOLL_PIN pages")
> 47e29d32af ("mm/gup: page->hpage_pinned_refcount: exact pin counts for huge pages")
>
> 3faa52c03f440d1b 47e29d32afba11b13efb51f0315
> ---------------- ---------------------------
> fail:runs %reproduction fail:runs
> | | |
> 1:4 -25% :4 kmsg.Spurious_LAPIC_timer_interrupt_on_cpu
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 4585 ± 2% -45.0% 2522 phoronix-test-suite.npb.FT.A.total_mop_s
> 1223 ± 4% +40.2% 1714 phoronix-test-suite.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
>
>
>
> phoronix-test-suite.npb.FT.A.total_mop_s
>
> 6500 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
> | .+. .+. .+. |
> 6000 |.+ +.+.+.++.+.+.+.+.+.+.+ +.+.++ +.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.++.+ |
> 5500 |-+ : |
> | : |
> 5000 |-+ : |
> 4500 |-+ +.+.+.|
> | |
> 4000 |-+ |
> 3500 |-+ |
> | |
> 3000 |-+ |
> 2500 |-+ O O O |
> | O O O O O OO O O O O O O O O O O |
> 2000 +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
> [*] bisect-good sample
> [O] bisect-bad sample
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Oliver Sang
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists