On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 1:46 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 09:55:26AM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 3, 2022 at 12:20 AM Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > [...]
> >
> > > >
> > > > But unfortunately, I did not keep the data. I will run it again and
> > > > submit the data.
> > >
> >
> > I have finished the test on a machine with two sockets and 256 cpus.
> > The test runs against the kernel with three commits reverted.
> > 96926686deab ("rcu: Make CPU-hotplug removal operations enable tick")
> > 53e87e3cdc15 ("timers/nohz: Last resort update jiffies on nohz_full
> > IRQ entry")
> > a1ff03cd6fb9c5 ("tick: Detect and fix jiffies update stall")
> >
> > Summary from console.log
> > "
> > --- Sat Oct 8 11:34:02 AM EDT 2022 Test summary:
> > Results directory:
> > /home/linux/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/res/2022.10.07-23.10.54
> > tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/kvm.sh --allcpus --duration
> > 125h --bootargs rcutorture.onoff_interval=200
> > rcutorture.onoff_holdoff=30 --configs 32*TREE04
> > TREE04 ------- 1365444 GPs (3.03432/s) n_max_cbs: 850290
> > TREE04 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44512 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.10 ------- 1331565 GPs (2.95903/s) n_max_cbs: 909075
> > TREE04.10 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.11 ------- 1331535 GPs (2.95897/s) n_max_cbs: 1213974
> > TREE04.11 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.12 ------- 1322160 GPs (2.93813/s) n_max_cbs: 2615313
> > TREE04.12 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.13 ------- 1320032 GPs (2.9334/s) n_max_cbs: 914751
> > TREE04.13 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.14 ------- 1339969 GPs (2.97771/s) n_max_cbs: 1560203
> > TREE04.14 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.15 ------- 1318805 GPs (2.93068/s) n_max_cbs: 1757478
> > TREE04.15 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44510 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.16 ------- 1340633 GPs (2.97918/s) n_max_cbs: 1377647
> > TREE04.16 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44510 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.17 ------- 1322798 GPs (2.93955/s) n_max_cbs: 1266344
> > TREE04.17 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.18 ------- 1346302 GPs (2.99178/s) n_max_cbs: 1030713
> > TREE04.18 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.19 ------- 1322499 GPs (2.93889/s) n_max_cbs: 917118
> > TREE04.19 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > ...
> > TREE04.4 ------- 1310283 GPs (2.91174/s) n_max_cbs: 2146905
> > TREE04.4 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.5 ------- 1333238 GPs (2.96275/s) n_max_cbs: 1027172
> > TREE04.5 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.6 ------- 1313915 GPs (2.91981/s) n_max_cbs: 1017511
> > TREE04.6 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.7 ------- 1341871 GPs (2.98194/s) n_max_cbs: 816265
> > TREE04.7 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.8 ------- 1339412 GPs (2.97647/s) n_max_cbs: 1316404
> > TREE04.8 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44511 vs. 450000
> > TREE04.9 ------- 1327240 GPs (2.94942/s) n_max_cbs: 1409531
> > TREE04.9 no success message, 2897 successful version messages
> > Completed in 44510 vs. 450000
> > 32 runs with runtime errors.
> > --- Done at Sat Oct 8 11:34:10 AM EDT 2022 (12:23:16) exitcode 2
> > "
> > I have no idea about the test so just arbitrarily pick up the
> > console.log of TREE04.10 as an example. Please get it from attachment.
>
> Very good, thank you!
>
> Could you please clearly indicate what you tested? For example, if
> you have an externally visible git tree, please point me at the tree
> and the SHA-1. Or send a patch series clearly indicating what it is
> based on.
>
Yes, it is a good way to eliminate any unexpected mistakes before a rigid test.
Please clone it from https://github.com/pfliu/linux.git branch:
rcu#revert_tick_dep
> Then I can try a long run on a larger collection of systems.
>
Thank you very much.
> If that works out, we can see about adjustments to mainline. ;-)
>
Eager to see.
Thanks,
Pingfan
