Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757376AbXKLCSo (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:18:44 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752943AbXKLCSg (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:18:36 -0500 Received: from mga10.intel.com ([192.55.52.92]:28811 "EHLO fmsmga102.fm.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752543AbXKLCSg (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:18:36 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,402,1188802800"; d="scan'208";a="378786658" Subject: Re: iozone write 50% regression in kernel 2.6.24-rc1 From: "Zhang, Yanmin" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML In-Reply-To: <1194602064.6289.157.camel@twins> References: <1194601672.20251.60.camel@ymzhang> <1194602064.6289.157.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:14:00 +0800 Message-Id: <1194833640.20251.80.camel@ymzhang> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.9.2 (2.9.2-2.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2409 Lines: 54 On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 10:54 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2007-11-09 at 17:47 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > > Comparing with 2.6.23, iozone sequential write/rewrite (512M) has 50% regression > > in kernel 2.6.24-rc1. 2.6.24-rc2 has the same regression. > > > > My machine has 8 processor cores and 8GB memory. > > > > By bisect, I located patch > > http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=04fbfdc14e5f48463820d6b9807daa5e9c92c51f. > > > > > > Another behavior: with kernel 2.6.23, if I run iozone for many times after rebooting machine, > > the result looks stable. But with 2.6.24-rc1, the first run of iozone got a very small result and > > following run has 4Xorig_result. > > So the second run is 4x as fast as the first run? Pls. see below comments. > > > What I reported is the regression of 2nd/3rd run, because first run has bigger regression. > > So the 2nd and 3rd run are stable at 50% slower than .23? Almostly. I did more testing today. Pls. see below result list. > > > I also tried to change /proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio,dirty_backgroud_ratio and didn't get improvement. > > Could you try: > > --- > Subject: mm: speed up writeback ramp-up on clean systems I tested kernel 2.6.23, 2,6,24-rc2, 2.6.24-rc2_peter(2.6.24-rc2+this patch). 1) Compare among first/second/following running 2.6.23: second run of iozone will get about 28% improvement than first run. Following run is very stable like 2nd run. 2.6.24-rc2: second run of iozone will get about 170% improvement than first run. 3rd run will get about 80% improvement than 2nd. Following run is very stable like 3rd run. 2.6.24-rc2_peter: second run of iozone will get about 14% improvement than first run. Following run is mostly stable like 2nd run. So the new patch really improves the first run result. Comparing wiht 2.6.24-rc2, 2.6.24-rc2_peter has 330% improvement on the first run. 2) Compare among different kernels(based on the stable highest result): 2.6.24-rc2 has about 50% regression than 2.6.23. 2.6.24-rc2_peter has the same result like 2.6.24-rc2. >From this point of view, above patch has no improvement. :) -yanmin - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/