Hi,
在 2022/10/08 10:50, kernel test robot 写道:
Greeting,
FYI, we noticed a -10.6% regression of fio.read_iops due to commit:
I don't know how this is working but I'm *sure* this commit won't affect
performance. Please take a look at the commit, only wbt initialization
is touched, which is done while creating the device:
device_add_disk
blk_register_queue
wbt_enable_default
wbt_init
And io path is the same with or without this commit.
By the way, wbt should only work for write.
Thanks,
Kuai
commit: 8c5035dfbb9475b67c82b3fdb7351236525bf52b ("blk-wbt: call rq_qos_add() after wb_normal is initialized")
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master
in testcase: fio-basic
on test machine: 192 threads 4 sockets Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 9242 CPU @ 2.30GHz (Cascade Lake) with 192G memory
with following parameters:
runtime: 300s
nr_task: 8t
disk: 1SSD
fs: btrfs
rw: randread
bs: 2M
ioengine: sync
test_size: 256g
cpufreq_governor: performance
test-description: Fio is a tool that will spawn a number of threads or processes doing a particular type of I/O action as specified by the user.
test-url: https://github.com/axboe/fio
Details are as below:
=========================================================================================
bs/compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/fs/ioengine/kconfig/nr_task/rootfs/runtime/rw/tbox_group/test_size/testcase:
2M/gcc-11/performance/1SSD/btrfs/sync/x86_64-rhel-8.3/8t/debian-11.1-x86_64-20220510.cgz/300s/randread/lkp-csl-2ap4/256g/fio-basic
commit:
f7de4886fe ("rnbd-srv: remove struct rnbd_dev")
8c5035dfbb ("blk-wbt: call rq_qos_add() after wb_normal is initialized")
f7de4886fe8f008a 8c5035dfbb9475b67c82b3fdb73
---------------- ---------------------------
%stddev %change %stddev
\ | \
0.03 ±106% +0.2 0.22 ± 80% fio.latency_20ms%
0.02 ± 33% -0.0 0.01 ± 12% fio.latency_4ms%
2508 -10.6% 2243 fio.read_bw_MBps
6717440 +17.6% 7897088 fio.read_clat_90%_us
6892202 +19.0% 8202922 fio.read_clat_95%_us
7602176 ± 4% +18.4% 9000277 ± 3% fio.read_clat_99%_us
6374238 +11.8% 7127450 fio.read_clat_mean_us
363825 ± 10% +74.9% 636378 ± 5% fio.read_clat_stddev
1254 -10.6% 1121 fio.read_iops
104.97 +11.8% 117.32 fio.time.elapsed_time
104.97 +11.8% 117.32 fio.time.elapsed_time.max
13731 +5.6% 14498 ± 4% fio.time.maximum_resident_set_size
116.00 -8.2% 106.50 fio.time.percent_of_cpu_this_job_got
1.998e+10 +11.4% 2.226e+10 cpuidle..time
3.27 ± 3% +4.6% 3.42 iostat.cpu.iowait
4.49 ± 68% -2.1 2.38 ±152% perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.number
4.49 ± 68% -2.5 1.98 ±175% perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.number
557763 +5.4% 587781 proc-vmstat.pgfault
25488 +3.1% 26274 proc-vmstat.pgreuse
2459048 -10.1% 2209482 vmstat.io.bi
184649 ± 5% -10.4% 165526 ± 7% vmstat.system.cs
111733 ± 30% +61.8% 180770 ± 21% numa-meminfo.node0.AnonPages
113221 ± 30% +60.2% 181416 ± 21% numa-meminfo.node0.Inactive(anon)
11301 ± 24% +164.5% 29888 ±117% numa-meminfo.node2.Active(file)
104911 ± 39% -80.5% 20456 ±100% numa-meminfo.node3.AnonHugePages
131666 ± 27% -67.9% 42297 ± 82% numa-meminfo.node3.AnonPages
132698 ± 26% -67.5% 43158 ± 81% numa-meminfo.node3.Inactive(anon)
27934 ± 30% +61.8% 45196 ± 21% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_anon_pages
28306 ± 30% +60.2% 45358 ± 21% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_inactive_anon
28305 ± 30% +60.2% 45357 ± 21% numa-vmstat.node0.nr_zone_inactive_anon
6291 ± 24% +68.0% 10567 ± 26% numa-vmstat.node2.workingset_nodes
32925 ± 27% -67.9% 10571 ± 82% numa-vmstat.node3.nr_anon_pages
33182 ± 26% -67.5% 10786 ± 81% numa-vmstat.node3.nr_inactive_anon
33182 ± 26% -67.5% 10786 ± 81% numa-vmstat.node3.nr_zone_inactive_anon
161.78 ± 4% -28.2% 116.10 ± 30% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.runnable_avg.avg
161.46 ± 4% -28.2% 115.85 ± 30% sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.util_avg.avg
426382 +11.0% 473345 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock.avg
426394 +11.0% 473357 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock.max
426370 +11.0% 473331 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock.min
426139 +10.9% 472586 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock_task.avg
426368 +11.0% 473130 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock_task.max
416196 +11.1% 462228 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.clock_task.min
1156 ± 7% -10.8% 1031 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu.curr->pid.stddev
426372 +11.0% 473334 ± 6% sched_debug.cpu_clk
425355 +11.0% 472318 ± 6% sched_debug.ktime
426826 +11.0% 473787 ± 6% sched_debug.sched_clk
1.263e+09 -7.9% 1.164e+09 ± 3% perf-stat.i.branch-instructions
190886 ± 5% -10.8% 170290 ± 7% perf-stat.i.context-switches
1.979e+09 -8.8% 1.804e+09 ± 2% perf-stat.i.dTLB-loads
8.998e+08 -8.2% 8.257e+08 ± 2% perf-stat.i.dTLB-stores
6.455e+09 -8.0% 5.938e+09 ± 3% perf-stat.i.instructions
21.78 -8.4% 19.95 perf-stat.i.metric.M/sec
7045315 ± 4% -14.0% 6057863 ± 6% perf-stat.i.node-load-misses
2658563 ± 7% -21.9% 2077647 ± 12% perf-stat.i.node-loads
414822 ± 4% -12.9% 361455 ± 3% perf-stat.i.node-store-misses
1.251e+09 -7.8% 1.154e+09 ± 3% perf-stat.ps.branch-instructions
189082 ± 5% -10.7% 168849 ± 7% perf-stat.ps.context-switches
1.96e+09 -8.8% 1.789e+09 ± 2% perf-stat.ps.dTLB-loads
8.912e+08 -8.1% 8.187e+08 ± 2% perf-stat.ps.dTLB-stores
6.393e+09 -7.9% 5.888e+09 ± 3% perf-stat.ps.instructions
6978485 ± 4% -13.9% 6006510 ± 6% perf-stat.ps.node-load-misses
2633627 ± 7% -21.8% 2060033 ± 12% perf-stat.ps.node-loads
410822 ± 4% -12.8% 358289 ± 3% perf-stat.ps.node-store-misses
If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <yujie.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
| Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202210081045.77ddf59b-yujie.liu@xxxxxxxxx
To reproduce:
git clone https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests.git
cd lkp-tests
sudo bin/lkp install job.yaml # job file is attached in this email
bin/lkp split-job --compatible job.yaml # generate the yaml file for lkp run
sudo bin/lkp run generated-yaml-file
# if come across any failure that blocks the test,
# please remove ~/.lkp and /lkp dir to run from a clean state.
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.
