On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 09:33:36AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 09:15:00AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:10:19PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > Ok, so the numa issue was a red herring. With that fixed: > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Dave Chinner <da...@fromorbit.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Better, but still bad. average files/s is not up to 200k files/s, > > > > so still a good 10-15% off where it should be. xfs_repair is back > > > > down to 10-15% off where it should be, too. bulkstat still fires off > > > > a bad page reference count warning, iscsi still panics immediately. > > > > > > Do you have CONFIG_BLK_WBT enabled, perhaps? > > > > Ok, yes, that's enabled. Let me go turn it off and see what happens. > > Numbers are still all over the place. > > FSUse% Count Size Files/sec App Overhead > ..... > 0 28800000 0 228175.5 21928812 > 0 30400000 0 167880.5 39628229 > 0 32000000 0 124289.5 41420925 > 0 33600000 0 150577.9 35382318 > 0 35200000 0 216535.4 16072628 > 0 36800000 0 233414.4 11846654 > 0 38400000 0 213812.0 13356633 > 0 40000000 0 175905.7 53012015 > 0 41600000 0 157028.7 34700794 > 0 43200000 0 138829.1 50282461 > > And the average is now back down to 185k files/s. repair runtime is > unchanged and still 10-15% off... > > I've got to run away for a few hours right now, but I'll retest the > 4.9 + xfs for-next branch when I get back to see if the problem is > my curent config or whether there really is a perf problem lurking > somewhere....
Well, I'm not sure now. Taking that config back to 4.9 gave results of 210k files/s. A bit faster, but still not the 230k files/s I'm expecting. So I'm missing something in the .config at this point, though I'm not sure what. FWIW, updating from 4.9 to to the 4.10 tree, this happened: $ $ make oldconfig; make -j 32 scripts/kconfig/conf --oldconfig Kconfig * * Restart config... * * * General setup * Yup, it definitely did something unexpected. And almost silently, I might add - I didn't notice this the first time around, and wouldn't hav enoticed it this time if I wasn't looking for something strange to happen. As iit is, I still haven't found what magic config option is taking away that 10-15% of performance. There's no unexpected debug options set, and it's nothing obvious in the fs/block layer config. I'll keep looking for the moment... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner da...@fromorbit.com
