Received: by 2002:a25:6193:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp3943126ybb; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 19:41:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLCpIhuR+f8kTgyUMrJErIehEfVTI7AQfmS2hPDcJGVRn8KaeToMGBlxVxlBA3YDONit8SC X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2214:: with SMTP id cq20mr18060100edb.16.1586832087437; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 19:41:27 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1586832087; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=vVtKGclgd0xP74MN3sxdr3D83N10DyK7iwgW0a4PEJXZinWbdpIgJyaDe/6WOGAm8O jJjOlxt3BEszQJY/NS9XwdqoZYGUwd+tC+KMA5jLyy/p+k2TtK2JDCj5DE/qejE+pOJx 9F/JO3kNkCzelpJRfHxYq49spXSI3x5NYRMdkLggGVbNCQsNbJqqorUrksv11vIRqllF KfK7KYNW2/4nev9pG/VYHJsGDPBgQQ4FlI0sVZB6rINHj9O38xy2qv8JDaQ0/yTR9pUv wIFDEcpiKyizK6JRwsKkNdHQtWymT/kXrxSuROPhln7X3OSMc3WJa/qzyr+MBsMIcjVW l7Xw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:message-id:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:from :references:cc:to:subject; bh=G5LU8LQAv3GtmwGrir7yDkj0anuCu60QCgKHCgNF0Pw=; b=l8A7N5NSKehipbubDFQ+maMANw8f2N2wMEasDAWKbBPPfdKO8lNVVRDMyalXn9rWxF q09l7DULXmLYcgN3+f6gz00ffs4RU35xJZjQLKkWkYVpjGvNXcrfNHuFAlWfrfRvhLVi UE2k1th4eUNkTAbPBsOOm1Muk3IV5ZFTJytPTcNPAi0m4pJsaKHn06h/y0ljy+8RFKOS iCyKkGPaAo0X8rE1iV1HwmjMN3FYxqN8r9NT29qIILiaj8lUy/Xx65A3CISuz2VFW2UL Dd1TaVNRLEW3jjFpFLn8MRGONgheVkb0bvPZfFnOGnG9pzFPTEG2CEI+NmoHmmjJucO7 yoEw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id oz2si6197063ejb.90.2020.04.13.19.41.02; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 19:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728834AbgDMK5I (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 13 Apr 2020 06:57:08 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:62610 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728295AbgDMK5I (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Apr 2020 06:57:08 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098419.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 03DAXCXk075941 for ; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 06:57:04 -0400 Received: from e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.97]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 30b6tumhuv-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 06:57:04 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 11:56:31 +0100 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp01.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.131) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Mon, 13 Apr 2020 11:56:27 +0100 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 03DAuw421376672 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:56:58 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F368AE045; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:56:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B0D1AE04D; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:56:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.199.58.161]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:56:56 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [LKP] [ext4] d3b6f23f71: stress-ng.fiemap.ops_per_sec -60.5% regression To: Xing Zhengjun , kernel test robot Cc: "Theodore Ts'o" , kbuild test robot , Jan Kara , "Darrick J. Wong" , LKML , lkp@lists.01.org References: <20200407080036.GA8179@shao2-debian> From: Ritesh Harjani Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 16:26:51 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 20041310-4275-0000-0000-000003BEFFBE X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 20041310-4276-0000-0000-000038D46E07 Message-Id: <20200413105656.9B0D1AE04D@d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138,18.0.676 definitions=2020-04-13_04:2020-04-13,2020-04-13 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2004130079 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 4/13/20 2:07 PM, Xing Zhengjun wrote: > Hi Harjani, > > ?? Do you have time to take a look at this? Thanks. Hello Xing, I do want to look into this. But as of now I am stuck with another mballoc failure issue. I will get back at this once I have some handle over that one. BTW, are you planning to take look at this? -ritesh > > On 4/7/2020 4:00 PM, kernel test robot wrote: >> Greeting, >> >> FYI, we noticed a -60.5% regression of stress-ng.fiemap.ops_per_sec >> due to commit: >> >> >> commit: d3b6f23f71670007817a5d59f3fbafab2b794e8c ("ext4: move >> ext4_fiemap to use iomap framework") >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master >> >> in testcase: stress-ng >> on test machine: 96 threads Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6252 CPU @ 2.10GHz >> with 192G memory >> with following parameters: >> >> ????nr_threads: 10% >> ????disk: 1HDD >> ????testtime: 1s >> ????class: os >> ????cpufreq_governor: performance >> ????ucode: 0x500002c >> ????fs: ext4 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> 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 run???? job.yaml >> >> ========================================================================================= >> >> class/compiler/cpufreq_governor/disk/fs/kconfig/nr_threads/rootfs/tbox_group/testcase/testtime/ucode: >> >> >> os/gcc-7/performance/1HDD/ext4/x86_64-rhel-7.6/10%/debian-x86_64-20191114.cgz/lkp-csl-2sp5/stress-ng/1s/0x500002c >> >> >> commit: >> ?? b2c5764262 ("ext4: make ext4_ind_map_blocks work with fiemap") >> ?? d3b6f23f71 ("ext4: move ext4_fiemap to use iomap framework") >> >> b2c5764262edded1 d3b6f23f71670007817a5d59f3f >> ---------------- --------------------------- >> ??????? fail:runs? %reproduction??? fail:runs >> ??????????? |???????????? |???????????? | >> ??????????? :4?????????? 25%?????????? 1:4 >> dmesg.WARNING:at#for_ip_interrupt_entry/0x >> ?????????? 2:4??????????? 5%?????????? 2:4 >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.sync_regs.error_entry >> ?????????? 2:4??????????? 6%?????????? 3:4 >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.error_entry >> ?????????? 3:4??????????? 9%?????????? 3:4 >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.error_entry >> ?????????? 0:4??????????? 1%?????????? 0:4 >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.error_entry >> ????????? %stddev???? %change???????? %stddev >> ????????????? \????????? |??????????????? \ >> ????? 28623?????????? +28.2%????? 36703 ? 12%? stress-ng.daemon.ops >> ????? 28632?????????? +28.2%????? 36704 ? 12% >> stress-ng.daemon.ops_per_sec >> ???? 566.00 ? 22%???? -53.2%???? 265.00 ? 53%? stress-ng.dev.ops >> ???? 278.81 ? 22%???? -53.0%???? 131.00 ? 54%? stress-ng.dev.ops_per_sec >> ????? 73160?????????? -60.6%????? 28849 ?? 3%? stress-ng.fiemap.ops >> ????? 72471?????????? -60.5%????? 28612 ?? 3% >> stress-ng.fiemap.ops_per_sec >> ????? 23421 ? 12%???? +21.2%????? 28388 ?? 6%? stress-ng.filename.ops >> ????? 22638 ? 12%???? +20.3%????? 27241 ?? 6% >> stress-ng.filename.ops_per_sec >> ????? 21.25 ?? 7%???? -10.6%????? 19.00 ?? 3%? stress-ng.iomix.ops >> ????? 38.75 ? 49%???? -47.7%????? 20.25 ? 96%? stress-ng.memhotplug.ops >> ????? 34.45 ? 52%???? -51.8%????? 16.62 ?106% >> stress-ng.memhotplug.ops_per_sec >> ?????? 1734 ? 10%???? +31.4%?????? 2278 ? 10%? stress-ng.resources.ops >> ???? 807.56 ?? 5%???? +35.2%?????? 1091 ?? 8% >> stress-ng.resources.ops_per_sec >> ??? 1007356 ?? 3%???? -16.5%???? 840642 ?? 9%? stress-ng.revio.ops >> ??? 1007692 ?? 3%???? -16.6%???? 840711 ?? 9% >> stress-ng.revio.ops_per_sec >> ????? 21812 ?? 3%???? +16.0%????? 25294 ?? 5%? stress-ng.sysbadaddr.ops >> ????? 21821 ?? 3%???? +15.9%????? 25294 ?? 5% >> stress-ng.sysbadaddr.ops_per_sec >> ???? 440.75 ?? 4%???? +21.9%???? 537.25 ?? 9%? stress-ng.sysfs.ops >> ???? 440.53 ?? 4%???? +21.9%???? 536.86 ?? 9% >> stress-ng.sysfs.ops_per_sec >> ?? 13286582?????????? -11.1%?? 11805520 ?? 6% >> stress-ng.time.file_system_outputs >> ?? 68253896??????????? +2.4%?? 69860122 >> stress-ng.time.minor_page_faults >> ???? 197.00 ?? 4%???? -15.9%???? 165.75 ? 12%? stress-ng.xattr.ops >> ???? 192.45 ?? 5%???? -16.1%???? 161.46 ? 11% >> stress-ng.xattr.ops_per_sec >> ????? 15310?????????? +62.5%????? 24875 ? 22%? stress-ng.zombie.ops >> ????? 15310?????????? +62.5%????? 24874 ? 22% >> stress-ng.zombie.ops_per_sec >> ???? 203.50 ? 12%???? -47.3%???? 107.25 ? 49%? vmstat.io.bi >> ???? 861318 ? 18%???? -29.7%???? 605884 ?? 5%? meminfo.AnonHugePages >> ??? 1062742 ? 14%???? -20.2%???? 847853 ?? 3%? meminfo.AnonPages >> ????? 31093 ?? 6%????? +9.6%????? 34090 ?? 3%? meminfo.KernelStack >> ?????? 7151 ? 34%???? +55.8%????? 11145 ?? 9%? meminfo.Mlocked >> ? 1.082e+08 ?? 5%???? -40.2%?? 64705429 ? 31% >> numa-numastat.node0.local_node >> ? 1.082e+08 ?? 5%???? -40.2%?? 64739883 ? 31% >> numa-numastat.node0.numa_hit >> ?? 46032662 ? 21%??? +104.3%?? 94042918 ? 20% >> numa-numastat.node1.local_node >> ?? 46074205 ? 21%??? +104.2%?? 94072810 ? 20% >> numa-numastat.node1.numa_hit >> ?????? 3942 ?? 3%???? +14.2%?????? 4501 ?? 4% >> slabinfo.pool_workqueue.active_objs >> ?????? 4098 ?? 3%???? +14.3%?????? 4683 ?? 4% >> slabinfo.pool_workqueue.num_objs >> ?????? 4817 ?? 7%???? +13.3%?????? 5456 ?? 8% >> slabinfo.proc_dir_entry.active_objs >> ?????? 5153 ?? 6%???? +12.5%?????? 5797 ?? 8% >> slabinfo.proc_dir_entry.num_objs >> ????? 18598 ? 13%???? -33.1%????? 12437 ? 20% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load.avg >> ???? 452595 ? 56%???? -71.4%???? 129637 ? 76% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load.max >> ????? 67675 ? 35%???? -55.1%????? 30377 ? 42% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.load.stddev >> ????? 18114 ? 12%???? -33.7%????? 12011 ? 20% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.runnable_weight.avg >> ???? 448215 ? 58%???? -72.8%???? 121789 ? 82% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.runnable_weight.max >> ????? 67083 ? 37%???? -56.3%????? 29305 ? 43% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.runnable_weight.stddev >> ???? -38032????????? +434.3%??? -203212 >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.spread0.avg >> ??? -204466?????????? +95.8%??? -400301 >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.spread0.min >> ????? 90.02 ? 25%???? -58.1%????? 37.69 ? 52% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.util_est_enqueued.avg >> ???? 677.54 ?? 6%???? -39.3%???? 411.50 ? 22% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.util_est_enqueued.max >> ???? 196.57 ?? 8%???? -47.6%???? 103.05 ? 36% >> sched_debug.cfs_rq:/.util_est_enqueued.stddev >> ?????? 3.34 ? 23%???? +34.1%?????? 4.48 ?? 4% >> sched_debug.cpu.clock.stddev >> ?????? 3.34 ? 23%???? +34.1%?????? 4.48 ?? 4% >> sched_debug.cpu.clock_task.stddev >> ???? 402872 ?? 7%???? -11.9%???? 354819 ?? 2%? proc-vmstat.nr_active_anon >> ??? 1730331??????????? -9.5%??? 1566418 ?? 5%? proc-vmstat.nr_dirtied >> ????? 31042 ?? 6%????? +9.3%????? 33915 ?? 3% >> proc-vmstat.nr_kernel_stack >> ???? 229047??????????? -2.4%???? 223615??????? proc-vmstat.nr_mapped >> ????? 74008 ?? 7%???? +20.5%????? 89163 ?? 8%? proc-vmstat.nr_written >> ???? 402872 ?? 7%???? -11.9%???? 354819 ?? 2% >> proc-vmstat.nr_zone_active_anon >> ????? 50587 ? 11%???? -25.2%????? 37829 ? 14% >> proc-vmstat.numa_pages_migrated >> ???? 457500?????????? -23.1%???? 351918 ? 31% >> proc-vmstat.numa_pte_updates >> ?? 81382485??????????? +1.9%?? 82907822??????? proc-vmstat.pgfault >> ? 2.885e+08 ?? 5%???? -13.3%? 2.502e+08 ?? 6%? proc-vmstat.pgfree >> ????? 42206 ? 12%???? -46.9%????? 22399 ? 49%? proc-vmstat.pgpgin >> ???? 431233 ? 13%???? -64.8%???? 151736 ?109%? proc-vmstat.pgrotated >> ???? 176754 ?? 7%???? -40.2%???? 105637 ? 31% >> proc-vmstat.thp_fault_alloc >> ???? 314.50 ? 82%??? +341.5%?????? 1388 ? 44% >> proc-vmstat.unevictable_pgs_stranded >> ??? 1075269 ? 14%???? -41.3%???? 631388 ? 17%? numa-meminfo.node0.Active >> ???? 976056 ? 12%???? -39.7%???? 588727 ? 19% >> numa-meminfo.node0.Active(anon) >> ???? 426857 ? 22%???? -36.4%???? 271375 ? 13% >> numa-meminfo.node0.AnonHugePages >> ???? 558590 ? 19%???? -36.4%???? 355402 ? 14% >> numa-meminfo.node0.AnonPages >> ??? 1794824 ?? 9%???? -28.8%??? 1277157 ? 20% >> numa-meminfo.node0.FilePages >> ?????? 8517 ? 92%???? -82.7%?????? 1473 ? 89% >> numa-meminfo.node0.Inactive(file) >> ???? 633118 ?? 2%???? -41.7%???? 368920 ? 36%? numa-meminfo.node0.Mapped >> ??? 2958038 ? 12%???? -27.7%??? 2139271 ? 12%? numa-meminfo.node0.MemUsed >> ???? 181401 ?? 5%???? -13.7%???? 156561 ?? 4% >> numa-meminfo.node0.SUnreclaim >> ???? 258124 ?? 6%???? -13.0%???? 224535 ?? 5%? numa-meminfo.node0.Slab >> ???? 702083 ? 16%???? +31.0%???? 919406 ? 11%? numa-meminfo.node1.Active >> ????? 38663 ?107%??? +137.8%????? 91951 ? 31% >> numa-meminfo.node1.Active(file) >> ??? 1154975 ?? 7%???? +41.6%??? 1635593 ? 12% >> numa-meminfo.node1.FilePages >> ???? 395813 ? 25%???? +62.8%???? 644533 ? 16% >> numa-meminfo.node1.Inactive >> ???? 394313 ? 25%???? +62.5%???? 640686 ? 16% >> numa-meminfo.node1.Inactive(anon) >> ???? 273317?????????? +88.8%???? 515976 ? 25%? numa-meminfo.node1.Mapped >> ??? 2279237 ?? 6%???? +25.7%??? 2865582 ?? 7%? numa-meminfo.node1.MemUsed >> ????? 10830 ? 18%???? +29.6%????? 14033 ?? 9% >> numa-meminfo.node1.PageTables >> ???? 149390 ?? 3%???? +23.2%???? 184085 ?? 3% >> numa-meminfo.node1.SUnreclaim >> ???? 569542 ? 16%???? +74.8%???? 995336 ? 21%? numa-meminfo.node1.Shmem >> ???? 220774 ?? 5%???? +20.3%???? 265656 ?? 3%? numa-meminfo.node1.Slab >> ?? 35623587 ?? 5%???? -11.7%?? 31444514 ?? 3%? perf-stat.i.cache-misses >> ? 2.576e+08 ?? 5%????? -6.8%??? 2.4e+08 ?? 2% >> perf-stat.i.cache-references >> ?????? 3585??????????? -7.3%?????? 3323 ?? 5%? perf-stat.i.cpu-migrations >> ???? 180139 ?? 2%????? +4.2%???? 187668??????? perf-stat.i.minor-faults >> ????? 69.13??????????? +2.6?????? 71.75 >> perf-stat.i.node-load-miss-rate% >> ??? 4313695 ?? 2%????? -7.4%??? 3994957 ?? 2% >> perf-stat.i.node-load-misses >> ??? 5466253 ? 11%???? -17.3%??? 4521173 ?? 6%? perf-stat.i.node-loads >> ??? 2818674 ?? 6%???? -15.8%??? 2372542 ?? 5%? perf-stat.i.node-stores >> ???? 227810??????????? +4.6%???? 238290??????? perf-stat.i.page-faults >> ????? 12.67 ?? 4%????? -7.2%????? 11.76 ?? 2%? perf-stat.overall.MPKI >> ?????? 1.01 ?? 4%????? -0.0??????? 0.97 ?? 3% >> perf-stat.overall.branch-miss-rate% >> ?????? 1044?????????? +13.1%?????? 1181 ?? 4% >> perf-stat.overall.cycles-between-cache-misses >> ????? 40.37 ?? 4%????? +3.6?????? 44.00 ?? 2% >> perf-stat.overall.node-store-miss-rate% >> ?? 36139526 ?? 5%???? -12.5%?? 31625519 ?? 3%? perf-stat.ps.cache-misses >> ? 2.566e+08 ?? 5%????? -6.9%? 2.389e+08 ?? 2% >> perf-stat.ps.cache-references >> ?????? 3562??????????? -7.2%?????? 3306 ?? 5% >> perf-stat.ps.cpu-migrations >> ???? 179088??????????? +4.2%???? 186579??????? perf-stat.ps.minor-faults >> ??? 4323383 ?? 2%????? -7.5%??? 3999214 >> perf-stat.ps.node-load-misses >> ??? 5607721 ? 10%???? -18.5%??? 4568664 ?? 6%? perf-stat.ps.node-loads >> ??? 2855134 ?? 7%???? -16.4%??? 2387345 ?? 5%? perf-stat.ps.node-stores >> ???? 226270??????????? +4.6%???? 236709??????? perf-stat.ps.page-faults >> ???? 242305 ? 10%???? -42.4%???? 139551 ? 18% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_active_anon >> ???? 135983 ? 17%???? -37.4%????? 85189 ? 10% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_anon_pages >> ???? 209.25 ? 16%???? -38.1%???? 129.50 ? 10% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_anon_transparent_hugepages >> ???? 449367 ?? 9%???? -29.7%???? 315804 ? 20% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_file_pages >> ?????? 2167 ? 90%???? -80.6%???? 419.75 ? 98% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_inactive_file >> ???? 157405 ?? 3%???? -41.4%????? 92206 ? 35% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_mapped >> ?????? 2022 ? 30%???? -73.3%???? 539.25 ? 91%? numa-vmstat.node0.nr_mlock >> ?????? 3336 ? 10%???? -24.3%?????? 2524 ? 25% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_page_table_pages >> ???? 286158 ? 10%???? -41.2%???? 168337 ? 37%? numa-vmstat.node0.nr_shmem >> ????? 45493 ?? 5%???? -14.1%????? 39094 ?? 4% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_slab_unreclaimable >> ???? 242294 ? 10%???? -42.4%???? 139547 ? 18% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_zone_active_anon >> ?????? 2167 ? 90%???? -80.6%???? 419.75 ? 98% >> numa-vmstat.node0.nr_zone_inactive_file >> ?? 54053924 ?? 8%???? -39.3%?? 32786242 ? 34%? numa-vmstat.node0.numa_hit >> ?? 53929628 ?? 8%???? -39.5%?? 32619715 ? 34% >> numa-vmstat.node0.numa_local >> ?????? 9701 ?107%??? +136.9%????? 22985 ? 31% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_active_file >> ???? 202.50 ? 16%???? -25.1%???? 151.75 ? 23% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_anon_transparent_hugepages >> ???? 284922 ?? 7%???? +43.3%???? 408195 ? 13% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_file_pages >> ????? 96002 ? 26%???? +67.5%???? 160850 ? 17% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_inactive_anon >> ????? 68077 ?? 2%???? +90.3%???? 129533 ? 25% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_mapped >> ???? 138482 ? 15%???? +79.2%???? 248100 ? 22%? numa-vmstat.node1.nr_shmem >> ????? 37396 ?? 3%???? +23.3%????? 46094 ?? 3% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_slab_unreclaimable >> ?????? 9701 ?107%??? +136.9%????? 22985 ? 31% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_zone_active_file >> ????? 96005 ? 26%???? +67.5%???? 160846 ? 17% >> numa-vmstat.node1.nr_zone_inactive_anon >> ?? 23343661 ? 17%???? +99.9%?? 46664267 ? 23%? numa-vmstat.node1.numa_hit >> ?? 23248487 ? 17%??? +100.5%?? 46610447 ? 23% >> numa-vmstat.node1.numa_local >> ???? 105745 ? 23%??? +112.6%???? 224805 ? 24%? softirqs.CPU0.NET_RX >> ???? 133310 ? 36%???? -45.3%????? 72987 ? 52%? softirqs.CPU1.NET_RX >> ???? 170110 ? 55%???? -66.8%????? 56407 ?147%? softirqs.CPU11.NET_RX >> ????? 91465 ? 36%???? -65.2%????? 31858 ?112%? softirqs.CPU13.NET_RX >> ???? 164491 ? 57%???? -77.7%????? 36641 ?121%? softirqs.CPU15.NET_RX >> ???? 121069 ? 55%???? -99.3%???? 816.75 ? 96%? softirqs.CPU17.NET_RX >> ????? 81019 ?? 4%????? -8.7%????? 73967 ?? 4%? softirqs.CPU20.RCU >> ????? 72143 ? 63%???? -89.8%?????? 7360 ?172%? softirqs.CPU22.NET_RX >> ???? 270663 ? 17%???? -57.9%???? 113915 ? 45%? softirqs.CPU24.NET_RX >> ????? 20149 ? 76%??? +474.1%???? 115680 ? 62%? softirqs.CPU26.NET_RX >> ????? 14033 ? 70%??? +977.5%???? 151211 ? 75%? softirqs.CPU27.NET_RX >> ????? 27834 ? 94%??? +476.1%???? 160357 ? 28%? softirqs.CPU28.NET_RX >> ????? 35346 ? 68%??? +212.0%???? 110290 ? 30%? softirqs.CPU29.NET_RX >> ????? 34347 ?103%??? +336.5%???? 149941 ? 32%? softirqs.CPU32.NET_RX >> ????? 70077 ?? 3%???? +10.8%????? 77624 ?? 3%? softirqs.CPU34.RCU >> ????? 36453 ? 84%??? +339.6%???? 160253 ? 42%? softirqs.CPU36.NET_RX >> ????? 72367 ?? 2%???? +10.6%????? 80043??????? softirqs.CPU37.RCU >> ????? 25239 ?118%??? +267.7%????? 92799 ? 45%? softirqs.CPU38.NET_RX >> ?????? 4995 ?170%?? +1155.8%????? 62734 ? 62%? softirqs.CPU39.NET_RX >> ?????? 4641 ?145%?? +1611.3%????? 79432 ? 90%? softirqs.CPU42.NET_RX >> ?????? 7192 ? 65%??? +918.0%????? 73225 ? 66%? softirqs.CPU45.NET_RX >> ?????? 1772 ?166%?? +1837.4%????? 34344 ? 63%? softirqs.CPU46.NET_RX >> ????? 13149 ? 81%??? +874.7%???? 128170 ? 58%? softirqs.CPU47.NET_RX >> ????? 86484 ? 94%???? -92.6%?????? 6357 ?172%? softirqs.CPU48.NET_RX >> ???? 129128 ? 27%???? -95.8%?????? 5434 ?172%? softirqs.CPU55.NET_RX >> ????? 82772 ? 59%???? -91.7%?????? 6891 ?164%? softirqs.CPU56.NET_RX >> ???? 145313 ? 57%???? -87.8%????? 17796 ? 88%? softirqs.CPU57.NET_RX >> ???? 118160 ? 33%???? -86.3%????? 16226 ?109%? softirqs.CPU58.NET_RX >> ????? 94576 ? 56%???? -94.1%?????? 5557 ?173%? softirqs.CPU6.NET_RX >> ????? 82900 ? 77%???? -66.8%????? 27508 ?171%? softirqs.CPU62.NET_RX >> ???? 157291 ? 30%???? -81.1%????? 29656 ?111%? softirqs.CPU64.NET_RX >> ???? 135101 ? 28%???? -80.2%????? 26748 ? 90%? softirqs.CPU67.NET_RX >> ???? 146574 ? 56%??? -100.0%????? 69.75 ? 98%? softirqs.CPU68.NET_RX >> ????? 81347 ?? 2%????? -9.0%????? 74024 ?? 2%? softirqs.CPU68.RCU >> ???? 201729 ? 37%???? -99.6%???? 887.50 ?107%? softirqs.CPU69.NET_RX >> ???? 108454 ? 78%???? -97.9%?????? 2254 ?169%? softirqs.CPU70.NET_RX >> ????? 55289 ?104%???? -89.3%?????? 5942 ?172%? softirqs.CPU71.NET_RX >> ????? 10112 ?172%??? +964.6%???? 107651 ? 89%? softirqs.CPU72.NET_RX >> ?????? 3136 ?171%?? +1522.2%????? 50879 ? 66%? softirqs.CPU73.NET_RX >> ????? 13353 ? 79%??? +809.2%???? 121407 ?101%? softirqs.CPU74.NET_RX >> ????? 75194 ?? 3%???? +10.3%????? 82957 ?? 5%? softirqs.CPU75.RCU >> ????? 11002 ?173%?? +1040.8%???? 125512 ? 61%? softirqs.CPU76.NET_RX >> ?????? 2463 ?173%?? +2567.3%????? 65708 ? 77%? softirqs.CPU78.NET_RX >> ????? 25956 ?? 3%????? -7.8%????? 23932 ?? 3%? softirqs.CPU78.SCHED >> ????? 16366 ?150%??? +340.7%????? 72125 ? 91%? softirqs.CPU82.NET_RX >> ????? 14553 ?130%?? +1513.4%???? 234809 ? 27%? softirqs.CPU93.NET_RX >> ????? 26314??????????? -9.2%????? 23884 ?? 3%? softirqs.CPU93.SCHED >> ?????? 4582 ? 88%?? +4903.4%???? 229268 ? 23%? softirqs.CPU94.NET_RX >> ????? 11214 ?111%?? +1762.5%???? 208867 ? 18%? softirqs.CPU95.NET_RX >> ?????? 1.53 ? 27%????? -0.5??????? 0.99 ? 17% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.exit_to_usermode_loop.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe >> >> ?????? 1.52 ? 27%????? -0.5??????? 0.99 ? 17% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe >> >> ?????? 1.39 ? 29%????? -0.5??????? 0.88 ? 21% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_group_exit.get_signal.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.do_syscall_64 >> >> ?????? 1.39 ? 29%????? -0.5??????? 0.88 ? 21% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.get_signal.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.do_syscall_64.entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe >> >> ?????? 0.50 ? 59%????? +0.3??????? 0.81 ? 13% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.filemap_map_pages.handle_pte_fault.__handle_mm_fault.handle_mm_fault.do_page_fault >> >> ?????? 5.70 ?? 9%????? +0.8??????? 6.47 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_exit.do_group_exit.get_signal.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop >> >> ?????? 5.48 ?? 9%????? +0.8??????? 6.27 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.exit_mmap.mmput.do_exit.do_group_exit.get_signal >> >> ?????? 5.49 ?? 9%????? +0.8??????? 6.28 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.mmput.do_exit.do_group_exit.get_signal.do_signal >> >> ?????? 4.30 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.60 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_group_exit.get_signal.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.prepare_exit_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 4.40 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.69 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.prepare_exit_to_usermode.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 4.37 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.66 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.exit_to_usermode_loop.prepare_exit_to_usermode.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 4.36 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.66 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.prepare_exit_to_usermode.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 4.33 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.62 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.get_signal.do_signal.exit_to_usermode_loop.prepare_exit_to_usermode.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 4.44 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.74 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 3.20 ? 10%????? -2.4??????? 0.78 ?156% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.copy_page >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 9%????? -0.1??????? 0.08 ? 64% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.irq_work_interrupt >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 9%????? -0.1??????? 0.08 ? 64% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.smp_irq_work_interrupt >> ?????? 0.24 ?? 5%????? -0.1??????? 0.17 ? 18% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.irq_work_run_list >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 9%????? -0.1??????? 0.10 ? 24% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.irq_work_run >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 9%????? -0.1??????? 0.10 ? 24% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.printk >> ?????? 0.23 ?? 6%????? -0.1??????? 0.17 ?? 9% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__do_execve_file >> ?????? 0.08 ? 14%????? -0.1??????? 0.03 ?100% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.delay_tsc >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 6%????? -0.1??????? 0.11 ?? 9% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.load_elf_binary >> ?????? 0.16 ?? 7%????? -0.0??????? 0.12 ? 13% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.search_binary_handler >> ?????? 0.20 ?? 7%????? -0.0??????? 0.15 ? 10% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.call_usermodehelper_exec_async >> ?????? 0.19 ?? 6%????? -0.0??????? 0.15 ? 11% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.do_execve >> ?????? 0.08 ? 10%????? -0.0??????? 0.04 ? 59% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__vunmap >> ?????? 0.15 ?? 3%????? -0.0??????? 0.11 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.rcu_idle_exit >> ?????? 0.12 ? 10%????? -0.0??????? 0.09 ? 14% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.__switch_to_asm >> ?????? 0.09 ? 13%????? -0.0??????? 0.07 ?? 5% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.des3_ede_encrypt >> ?????? 0.06 ? 11%????? +0.0??????? 0.09 ? 13% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.mark_page_accessed >> ?????? 0.15 ?? 5%????? +0.0??????? 0.19 ? 12% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.apparmor_cred_prepare >> ?????? 0.22 ?? 8%????? +0.0??????? 0.27 ? 11% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.mem_cgroup_throttle_swaprate >> ?????? 0.17 ?? 2%????? +0.0??????? 0.22 ? 12% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.security_prepare_creds >> ?????? 0.95 ? 17%????? +0.3??????? 1.22 ? 14% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.filemap_map_pages >> ?????? 5.92 ?? 8%????? +0.7??????? 6.65 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.get_signal >> ?????? 5.66 ?? 9%????? +0.8??????? 6.44 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.mmput >> ?????? 5.65 ?? 9%????? +0.8??????? 6.43 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.exit_mmap >> ?????? 4.40 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.70 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.prepare_exit_to_usermode >> ?????? 4.45 ?? 4%????? +1.3??????? 5.75 ?? 7% >> perf-profile.children.cycles-pp.swapgs_restore_regs_and_return_to_usermode >> >> ?????? 3.16 ? 10%????? -2.4??????? 0.77 ?155% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.copy_page >> ?????? 0.08 ? 14%????? -0.1??????? 0.03 ?100% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.delay_tsc >> ?????? 0.12 ? 10%????? -0.0??????? 0.09 ? 14% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.__switch_to_asm >> ?????? 0.08 ? 12%????? -0.0??????? 0.06 ? 17% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.enqueue_task_fair >> ?????? 0.09 ? 13%????? -0.0??????? 0.07 ?? 5% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.des3_ede_encrypt >> ?????? 0.07 ? 13%????? +0.0??????? 0.08 ? 19% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.__lru_cache_add >> ?????? 0.19 ?? 9%????? +0.0??????? 0.22 ? 10% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.mem_cgroup_throttle_swaprate >> ?????? 0.15 ?? 5%????? +0.0??????? 0.19 ? 11% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.apparmor_cred_prepare >> ?????? 0.05 ? 58%????? +0.0??????? 0.09 ? 13% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.mark_page_accessed >> ?????? 0.58 ? 10%????? +0.2??????? 0.80 ? 20% >> perf-profile.self.cycles-pp.release_pages >> ?????? 0.75 ?173%? +1.3e+05%?????? 1005 ?100% >> interrupts.127:PCI-MSI.31981660-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-91 >> ???? 820.75 ?111%???? -99.9%?????? 0.50 ?173% >> interrupts.47:PCI-MSI.31981580-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-11 >> ???? 449.25 ? 86%??? -100.0%?????? 0.00 >> interrupts.53:PCI-MSI.31981586-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-17 >> ????? 33.25 ?157%??? -100.0%?????? 0.00 >> interrupts.57:PCI-MSI.31981590-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-21 >> ?????? 0.75 ?110%? +63533.3%???? 477.25 ?162% >> interrupts.61:PCI-MSI.31981594-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-25 >> ???? 561.50 ?160%??? -100.0%?????? 0.00 >> interrupts.65:PCI-MSI.31981598-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-29 >> ????? 82921 ?? 8%???? -11.1%????? 73748 ?? 6% >> interrupts.CPU11.CAL:Function_call_interrupts >> ????? 66509 ? 30%???? -32.6%????? 44828 ?? 8% >> interrupts.CPU14.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 43105 ? 98%???? -90.3%?????? 4183 ? 21% >> interrupts.CPU17.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ???? 148719 ? 70%???? -69.4%????? 45471 ? 16% >> interrupts.CPU17.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 85589 ? 42%???? -52.2%????? 40884 ?? 5% >> interrupts.CPU20.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ???? 222472 ? 41%???? -98.0%?????? 4360 ? 45% >> interrupts.CPU22.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ?????? 0.50 ?173%? +95350.0%???? 477.25 ?162% >> interrupts.CPU25.61:PCI-MSI.31981594-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-25 >> ????? 76029 ? 10%???? +14.9%????? 87389 ?? 5% >> interrupts.CPU25.CAL:Function_call_interrupts >> ???? 399042 ?? 6%???? +13.4%???? 452479 ?? 8% >> interrupts.CPU27.LOC:Local_timer_interrupts >> ???? 561.00 ?161%??? -100.0%?????? 0.00 >> interrupts.CPU29.65:PCI-MSI.31981598-edge.i40e-eth0-TxRx-29 >> ?????? 7034 ? 46%?? +1083.8%????? 83279 ?138% >> interrupts.CPU29.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 17829 ? 99%???? -71.0%?????? 5172 ? 16% >> interrupts.CPU30.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ?????? 5569 ? 15%?? +2414.7%???? 140059 ? 94% >> interrupts.CPU31.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 37674 ? 16%???? +36.6%????? 51473 ? 25% >> interrupts.CPU31.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 47905 ? 39%???? +76.6%????? 84583 ? 38% >> interrupts.CPU34.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ???? 568.75 ?140%??? +224.8%?????? 1847 ? 90% >> interrupts.CPU36.NMI:Non-maskable_interrupts >> ???? 568.75 ?140%??? +224.8%?????? 1847 ? 90% >> interrupts.CPU36.PMI:Performance_monitoring_interrupts >> ?????? 4236 ? 25%?? +2168.5%????? 96092 ? 90% >> interrupts.CPU36.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 52717 ? 27%???? +43.3%????? 75565 ? 28% >> interrupts.CPU37.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 41418 ?? 9%??? +136.6%????? 98010 ? 50% >> interrupts.CPU39.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ?????? 5551 ?? 8%??? +847.8%????? 52615 ? 66% >> interrupts.CPU40.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ?????? 4746 ? 25%??? +865.9%????? 45841 ? 91% >> interrupts.CPU42.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 37556 ? 11%???? +24.6%????? 46808 ?? 6% >> interrupts.CPU42.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 21846 ?124%???? -84.4%?????? 3415 ? 46% >> interrupts.CPU48.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ???? 891.50 ? 22%???? -35.2%???? 577.25 ? 40% >> interrupts.CPU49.NMI:Non-maskable_interrupts >> ???? 891.50 ? 22%???? -35.2%???? 577.25 ? 40% >> interrupts.CPU49.PMI:Performance_monitoring_interrupts >> ????? 20459 ?120%???? -79.2%?????? 4263 ? 14% >> interrupts.CPU49.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 59840 ? 21%???? -23.1%????? 46042 ? 16% >> interrupts.CPU5.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 65200 ? 19%???? -34.5%????? 42678 ?? 9% >> interrupts.CPU51.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 70923 ?153%???? -94.0%?????? 4270 ? 29% >> interrupts.CPU53.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 65312 ? 22%???? -28.7%????? 46578 ? 14% >> interrupts.CPU56.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 65828 ? 24%???? -33.4%????? 43846 ?? 4% >> interrupts.CPU59.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 72558 ?156%???? -93.2%?????? 4906 ?? 9% >> interrupts.CPU6.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 68698 ? 34%???? -32.6%????? 46327 ? 18% >> interrupts.CPU61.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ???? 109745 ? 44%???? -57.4%????? 46711 ? 16% >> interrupts.CPU62.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 89714 ? 44%???? -48.5%????? 46198 ?? 7% >> interrupts.CPU63.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 59380 ?136%???? -91.5%?????? 5066 ? 13% >> interrupts.CPU69.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 40094 ? 18%??? +133.9%????? 93798 ? 44% >> interrupts.CPU78.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ???? 129884 ? 72%???? -55.3%????? 58034 ?157% >> interrupts.CPU8.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 69984 ? 11%???? +51.4%???? 105957 ? 20% >> interrupts.CPU80.CAL:Function_call_interrupts >> ????? 32857 ? 10%??? +128.7%????? 75131 ? 36% >> interrupts.CPU80.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 35726 ? 16%???? +34.6%????? 48081 ? 12% >> interrupts.CPU82.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 73820 ? 17%???? +28.2%????? 94643 ?? 8% >> interrupts.CPU84.CAL:Function_call_interrupts >> ????? 38829 ? 28%??? +190.3%???? 112736 ? 42% >> interrupts.CPU84.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 36129 ?? 4%???? +47.6%????? 53329 ? 13% >> interrupts.CPU85.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ?????? 4693 ?? 7%?? +1323.0%????? 66793 ?145% >> interrupts.CPU86.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 38003 ? 11%???? +94.8%????? 74031 ? 43% >> interrupts.CPU86.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 78022 ?? 3%????? +7.9%????? 84210 ?? 3% >> interrupts.CPU87.CAL:Function_call_interrupts >> ????? 36359 ?? 6%???? +54.9%????? 56304 ? 48% >> interrupts.CPU88.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 89031 ?105%???? -95.0%?????? 4475 ? 40% >> interrupts.CPU9.RES:Rescheduling_interrupts >> ????? 40085 ? 11%???? +60.6%????? 64368 ? 27% >> interrupts.CPU91.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 42244 ? 10%???? +44.8%????? 61162 ? 35% >> interrupts.CPU94.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> ????? 40959 ? 15%??? +109.4%????? 85780 ? 41% >> interrupts.CPU95.TLB:TLB_shootdowns >> >> >> ???????????????????????????????? stress-ng.fiemap.ops >> ?? 80000 >> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> ?? 75000 |..+.???????????? .+..??????????? .+..+..? .+. >> .+..??????????????? | >> ???????? |??? +..+..+..+.+.???? .+..+..? .+?????? +.?? +. >> +.+..+..+..+.+..| >> ?? 70000 |-+?????????????????? + >> +.??????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 65000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 60000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 55000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> >> |?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 50000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 45000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 40000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 35000 |-+ >> O??????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ???????? |? O?????? O?????????????????????? O???? O >> O???????????????????? | >> ?? 30000 |-+? O? O???? O O???? O O???? O? O??? O???? O??? O? O O? O >> O? O O? | >> ?? 25000 >> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> ???????????????????????????? stress-ng.fiemap.ops_per_sec >> ?? 80000 >> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> ?? 75000 |..?????????????? .+.. >> .+..?????????????????????????? | >> ???????? |? +.? .+..+..+.+.???? .+..+..? .+.+. >> +..+.+..+..+.+..+..+..+.+..| >> ?? 70000 |-+? +.?????????????? + >> +.??????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 65000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 60000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 55000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> >> |?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 50000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 45000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 40000 >> |-+???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ?? 35000 |-+ >> O??????????????????????????????????????????????? | >> ???????? |? O?????? O?????????????????????? O >> O????????????????????????? | >> ?? 30000 |-+? O? O???? O O???? O O???? O?????? O???? O O? O? O??? O >> O? O O? | >> ?? 25000 >> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+ >> [*] 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. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Rong Chen >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LKP mailing list -- lkp@lists.01.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to lkp-leave@lists.01.org >> >