Re: bdflush/rpciod high CPU utilization, profile does not make sense

[Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@unthought.net>]

On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:57:58PM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote:
...
> Will try either changing tg3 driver or putting in an e1000 on my NFS
> server - I will let you know about the status on this when I know more.

tg3 or e1000 on the NFS server doesn't make a noticable difference.

Now, I tried booting the 2.6.11 NFS client in uniprocessor mode
(thinking the rpciod threads might be wasting their time contending for
a lock), and that turned out to be interesting.

Performance on SMP NFS client:
         File   Block  Num  Seq Read    Rand Read   Seq Write  Rand Write
  Dir    Size   Size   Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
   .     2000   4096    1  47.53 80.0% 5.013 2.79% 22.34 32.2% 6.510 14.9%
   .     2000   4096    2  45.29 78.6% 8.068 5.44% 24.53 34.1% 7.042 14.9%
   .     2000   4096    4  45.38 78.0% 11.02 7.95% 25.13 35.1% 7.525 18.0%

Performance on UP NFS client:
         File   Block  Num  Seq Read    Rand Read   Seq Write  Rand Write
  Dir    Size   Size   Thr Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%) Rate (CPU%)
------- ------ ------- --- ----------- ----------- ----------- -----------
   .     2000   4096    1  57.11 54.7% 69.60 24.9% 35.09 14.2% 6.656 19.1%
   .     2000   4096    2  60.11 58.8% 70.99 30.8% 33.82 14.1% 7.283 25.1%
   .     2000   4096    4  67.89 59.8% 42.10 19.1% 29.86 12.7% 7.850 26.4%

So, by booting the NFS client in uniprocessor mode, I got a 50% write
performance boost, 20% read perforamance boost, and the tests use about
half the CPU time.

Isn't this a little disturbing?  :)

-- 

 / jakob

-
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/