netdev - Re: -27% netperf TCP_STREAM regression by "tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp

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]

Message-ID: <87a9i0l3v1.fsf@xmission.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Oct 2013 02:43:14 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: -27% netperf TCP_STREAM regression by "tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol"

Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com> writes:

> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 09:38:10PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
>> 
>> > From: fengguang.wu@...el.com
>> > Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 22:41:29 +0100
>> >
>> >> We noticed big netperf throughput regressions
>> >> 
>> >>     a4fe34bf902b8f709c63      2e685cad57906e19add7  
>> >> ------------------------  ------------------------  
>> >>                   707.40       -40.7%       419.60  lkp-nex04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>> >>                  2775.60       -23.7%      2116.40  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>> >>                  3483.00       -27.2%      2536.00  TOTAL netperf.Throughput_Mbps
>> >> 
>> >> and bisected it to
>> >> 
>> >> commit 2e685cad57906e19add7189b5ff49dfb6aaa21d3
>> >> Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>> >> Date:   Sat Oct 19 16:26:19 2013 -0700
>> >> 
>> >>     tcp_memcontrol: Kill struct tcp_memcontrol
>> >
>> > Eric please look into this, I'd rather have a fix to apply than revert your
>> > work.
>> 
>> Will do I expect some ordering changed, and that changed the cache line
>> behavior.
>> 
>> If I can't find anything we can revert this one particular patch without
>> affecting anything else, but it would be nice to keep the data structure
>> smaller.
>> 
>> Fengguag what would I need to do to reproduce this?
>
> Eric, attached is the kernel config.
>
> We used these commands in the test:
>
>         netserver
>         netperf -t TCP_STREAM -c -C -l 120      # repeat 64 times and get average
>
> btw, we've got more complete change set (attached) and also noticed
> performance increase in the TCP_SENDFILE case:
>
>     a4fe34bf902b8f709c63      2e685cad57906e19add7
> ------------------------  ------------------------
>                   707.40       -40.7%       419.60  lkp-nex04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  2572.20       -17.7%      2116.20  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_MAERTS
>                  2775.60       -23.7%      2116.40  lkp-sb03/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  1006.60       -54.4%       459.40  lkp-sbx04/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                  3278.60       -25.2%      2453.80  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_MAERTS
>                  1902.80       +21.7%      2315.00  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_SENDFILE
>                  3345.40       -26.7%      2451.00  lkp-t410/micro/netperf/120s-200%-TCP_STREAM
>                 15588.60       -20.9%     12331.40  TOTAL netperf.Throughput_Mbps

I have a second question.  Do you mount the cgroup filesystem?  Do you
set memory.kmem.tcp.limit_in_bytes?

If you aren't setting any memory cgroup limits or creating any groups
this change should not have had any effect whatsoever.  And you haven't
mentioned it so I don't expect you are enabling the memory cgroup limits
explicitly.

If you have enabled the memory cgroups can you please describe your
configuration as that may play a significant role.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html