| 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: <de61a3b5b6b1467ea7d377377c443572@hisilicon.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 09:20:31 +0000
From: "Song Bao Hua (Barry Song)" <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
To: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"lkp@...ts.01.org" <lkp@...ts.01.org>,
"lkp@...el.com" <lkp@...el.com>,
"ying.huang@...el.com" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"feng.tang@...el.com" <feng.tang@...el.com>,
"zhengjun.xing@...el.com" <zhengjun.xing@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [genirq] cbe16f35be: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.2%
regression
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kernel test robot [mailto:oliver.sang@...el.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 9:00 PM
> To: Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) <song.bao.hua@...ilicon.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>; Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>; 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
> Subject: [genirq] cbe16f35be: will-it-scale.per_thread_ops -5.2% regression
>
>
> Greeting,
>
> FYI, we noticed a -5.2% regression of will-it-scale.per_thread_ops due to
> commit:
>
>
> commit: cbe16f35bee6880becca6f20d2ebf6b457148552 ("genirq: Add IRQF_NO_AUTOEN
> for request_irq/nmi()")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
>
Might be relevant. Can't figure out the relation between getppid and
request_irq().
Thanks
Barry
>
> in testcase: will-it-scale
> on test machine: 88 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6238M CPU @ 2.10GHz with 128G
> memory
> with following parameters:
>
> nr_task: 100%
> mode: thread
> test: getppid1
> cpufreq_governor: performance
> ucode: 0x5003006
>
> test-description: Will It Scale takes a testcase and runs it from 1 through
> to n parallel copies to see if the testcase will scale. It builds both a process
> and threads based test in order to see any differences between the two.
> test-url: https://github.com/antonblanchard/will-it-scale
>
>
>
> 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 split-job --compatible job.yaml
> bin/lkp run compatible-job.yaml
>
> ==========================================================================
> ===============
> compiler/cpufreq_governor/kconfig/mode/nr_task/rootfs/tbox_group/test/test
> case/ucode:
>
> gcc-9/performance/x86_64-rhel-8.3/thread/100%/debian-10.4-x86_64-20200603.
> cgz/lkp-csl-2sp9/getppid1/will-it-scale/0x5003006
>
> commit:
> v5.12-rc2
> cbe16f35be ("genirq: Add IRQF_NO_AUTOEN for request_irq/nmi()")
>
> v5.12-rc2 cbe16f35bee6880becca6f20d2e
> ---------------- ---------------------------
> %stddev %change %stddev
> \ | \
> 7.408e+08 -5.2% 7.021e+08 will-it-scale.88.threads
> 8417726 -5.2% 7978644 will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
> 7.408e+08 -5.2% 7.021e+08 will-it-scale.workload
> 3.851e+10 -5.2% 3.65e+10 perf-stat.i.branch-instructions
> 1.839e+08 -4.2% 1.763e+08 perf-stat.i.branch-misses
> 1.39 +5.3% 1.46 perf-stat.i.cpi
> 5.988e+10 -5.2% 5.674e+10 perf-stat.i.dTLB-loads
> 4.139e+10 -5.2% 3.922e+10 perf-stat.i.dTLB-stores
> 2.239e+08 ± 3% -14.6% 1.913e+08 ± 4% perf-stat.i.iTLB-load-misses
> 1.741e+11 -5.2% 1.65e+11 perf-stat.i.instructions
> 794.20 ± 2% +10.7% 879.14 ± 4%
> perf-stat.i.instructions-per-iTLB-miss
> 0.72 -5.0% 0.68 perf-stat.i.ipc
> 1588 -5.2% 1505 perf-stat.i.metric.M/sec
> 1.39 +5.4% 1.47 perf-stat.overall.cpi
> 0.00 +0.0 0.00
> perf-stat.overall.dTLB-store-miss-rate%
> 778.31 ± 3% +11.1% 864.35 ± 4%
> perf-stat.overall.instructions-per-iTLB-miss
> 0.72 -5.1% 0.68 perf-stat.overall.ipc
> 3.838e+10 -5.2% 3.638e+10 perf-stat.ps.branch-instructions
> 1.833e+08 -4.2% 1.757e+08 perf-stat.ps.branch-misses
> 5.968e+10 -5.2% 5.655e+10 perf-stat.ps.dTLB-loads
> 4.125e+10 -5.2% 3.909e+10 perf-stat.ps.dTLB-stores
> 2.231e+08 ± 3% -14.6% 1.907e+08 ± 4% perf-stat.ps.iTLB-load-misses
> 1.735e+11 -5.2% 1.645e+11 perf-stat.ps.instructions
> 5.243e+13 -5.2% 4.971e+13 perf-stat.total.instructions
> 43.20 -2.3 40.87
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.__entry_text_start.getppid
> 9.09 -0.4 8.65 ± 2%
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.testcase
> 8.01 -0.3 7.66
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.syscall_return_via_sysret.getppid
> 2.93 -0.2 2.73
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.syscall_enter_from_user_mode.do_syscall_6
> 4.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe.getppid
> 3.02 -0.2 2.83
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_safe_stack.getppid
> 2.52 ± 3% +0.7 3.23 ± 9%
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.syscall_exit_to_user_mode_prepare.syscall
> _exit_to_user_mode.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe.getppid
> 18.24 +1.1 19.29
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwfr
> ame.getppid
> 13.33 +1.1 14.46 ± 2%
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.__x64_sys_getppid.do_syscall_64.entry_SYS
> CALL_64_after_hwframe.getppid
> 1.94 ± 2% +1.7 3.62 ± 3%
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.rcu_nocb_flush_deferred_wakeup.exit_to_us
> er_mode_prepare.syscall_exit_to_user_mode.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe.g
> etppid
> 7.47 ± 2% +1.8 9.25
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.exit_to_user_mode_prepare.syscall_exit_to
> _user_mode.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe.getppid
> 11.51 ± 2% +2.3 13.81 ± 2%
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.syscall_exit_to_user_mode.entry_SYSCALL_6
> 4_after_hwframe.getppid
> 39.05 +3.1 42.17
> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe.getppid
> 27.84 -1.5 26.36
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__entry_text_start
> 23.40 -1.2 22.22
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.syscall_return_via_sysret
> 2.97 -0.2 2.76
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.syscall_enter_from_user_mode
> 3.23 -0.2 3.03
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_safe_stack
> 0.41 ± 2% -0.0 0.37 ± 2%
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__x86_indirect_thunk_rax
> 2.56 ± 3% +0.7 3.25 ± 7%
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.syscall_exit_to_user_mode_prepare
> 13.88 +1.2 15.05 ± 2%
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__x64_sys_getppid
> 2.02 ± 2% +1.6 3.67 ± 3%
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.rcu_nocb_flush_deferred_wakeup
> 7.86 +1.7 9.60
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.exit_to_user_mode_prepare
> 12.71 +2.3 15.04 ± 2%
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.syscall_exit_to_user_mode
> 39.65 +3.1 42.77
> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> 23.19 -1.2 22.01
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.syscall_return_via_sysret
> 19.57 -1.1 18.50 perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.getppid
> 12.47 -0.6 11.83
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.__entry_text_start
> 8.60 -0.2 8.36
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> 3.22 -0.2 3.02
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.entry_SYSCALL_64_safe_stack
> 2.52 -0.2 2.35
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.syscall_enter_from_user_mode
> 3.58 +0.4 3.95
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.__x64_sys_getppid
> 2.12 ± 3% +0.6 2.74 ± 8%
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.syscall_exit_to_user_mode_prepare
> 1.72 ± 2% +1.7 3.41 ± 3%
> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.rcu_nocb_flush_deferred_wakeup
>
>
>
> will-it-scale.per_thread_ops
>
> 8.8e+06
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> 8.7e+06 |-+ .+. |
> | .+ + |
> 8.6e+06 |.+.+.+.+ + .+. .+.+. .+.+. .+.+.+.+. |
> 8.5e+06 |-+ ++ + + + +. |
> | +.+.++.+.+.+.+.+.+.+.|
> 8.4e+06 |-+ |
> 8.3e+06 |-O O O O O O OO |
> 8.2e+06 |-+ O O |
> | |
> 8.1e+06 |-+ |
> 8e+06 |-+ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O |
> | O O O O |
> 7.9e+06 |-+ O O O |
> 7.8e+06
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
>
>
> [*] 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.
>
>
> ---
> 0DAY/LKP+ Test Infrastructure Open Source Technology Center
> https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/lkp@lists.01.org Intel
> Corporation
>
> Thanks,
> Oliver Sang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists