Thanks for pushing the branch. I amended it a little and the teuthology run now passes[0]. There are still issues, I'm sure, but it's probably good enough for a pull request. Would you be so kind as to create one based on my branch[1] with the following cover? Thanks a again for your help :-) ---- Title: qa: verify the benefits of mempool cacheline optimization There already is a test to verify the mempool sharding works, in the sense that it uses at least half of the variables available to count the number of allocated objects and their total size. This new test verifies that, with sharding, object counting is at least twice faster than without sharding. It also collects cacheline contention data with the perf c2c tool. The manual analysis of this data shows the optimization gain is indeed related to cacheline contention. Teuthology run: http://pulpito.front.sepia.ceph.com/dachary-2021-04-24_20:04:29-rados:standalone:workloads:c2c.yaml-wip-mempool-cacheline-49781-distro-basic-smithi/6071225/ Mailing list discussion: https://lists.ceph.io/hyperkitty/list/dev@xxxxxxx/thread/XQDJV4NKEY2LOSFVOYDQSKPVIYADRNPV/#C3ASBEYU5X2PPF5SVUBOVEZ6JSTYUK54 Refs: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49781 ----- [0] http://pulpito.front.sepia.ceph.com/dachary-2021-04-24_20:04:29-rados:standalone:workloads:c2c.yaml-wip-mempool-cacheline-49781-distro-basic-smithi/6071225/ [1] https://lab.fedeproxy.eu/ceph/ceph/-/commits/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781 On 24/04/2021 18:08, Loïc Dachary wrote: > Hi Nathan, > > The repos built for https://shaman.ceph.com/builds/ceph/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781/ a few weeks ago expired, would you be so kind as to push the latest from my repo to the ceph-ci repository[1]? > > Thanks again for your help! > > [0] https://lab.fedeproxy.eu/ceph/ceph/-/blob/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781/ > [1] https://github.com/ceph/ceph-ci/tree/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781 > > On 04/04/2021 16:49, Loïc Dachary wrote: >> Thanks for pushing the branch on my behalf, it built OK[0] and I made some changes. Would you be so kind as to force-push the newer version[1]? >> >> [0] https://shaman.ceph.com/builds/ceph/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781/d9cb0ceae50de288ddee71c5bc84a7b2c5289211/ >> [1] https://lab.fedeproxy.eu/ceph/ceph/-/blob/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781/ >> >> On 02/04/2021 18:43, Loïc Dachary wrote: >>> Hi Nathan, >>> >>> I drafted a c2c standalone teuthology test[0]. Would you be so kind as to push it to GitHub on my behalf so that it builds the corresponding packages? I'm sorry to bother you with this but I don't know if there is another way to build the packages and tell teuthology to get them. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> [0] https://lab.fedeproxy.eu/ceph/ceph/-/tree/wip-mempool-cacheline-49781 >>> >>> On 25/03/2021 14:04, Loïc Dachary wrote: >>>> Hi Joe, >>>> >>>> Thanks for the comment, it makes perfect sense. I'm eager to work on it but I'll have be patient and wait until next week. >>>> >>>> To be continued! >>>> >>>> On 25/03/2021 13:40, jmario@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>> Hi Loïc: >>>>> One quick comment. >>>>> >>>>> Normally a script with many commands isn't needed to detect cacheline contention. The reason I gave you one is because I know nothing about your environment, the topology, the system, or the load you're running. The many commands in that script should give me enough information such that I don't come back a 2nd time asking you to rerun something because I needed more information. >>>>> >>>>> All it takes is one simple "perf c2c record ..." command to examine cacheline contention. And my goal is to help you see it yourself. >>>>> >>>>> Let me know when you have something. >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> Joe >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx >>>>> To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx -- Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list -- dev@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to dev-leave@xxxxxxx
