On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:51 PM, Boaz Harrosh <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 02/09/2011 09:02 PM, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> I have a new module that uses the async_tx.h lib.
>>
>> On an exact same module code based on 3.6.37 I see the:
>> xor: measuring software checksum speed
>> 8regs : 11312.000 MB/sec
>> 8regs_prefetch: 9792.800 MB/sec
>> 32regs : 11220.400 MB/sec
>> 32regs_prefetch: 9750.800 MB/sec
>> xor: using function: 8regs (11312.000 MB/sec)
>>
>> And all is well. But on code based on 2.6.38-rc4 I get hard stuck
>> right after:
>> xor: measuring software checksum speed
>>
>
> OK this is not dependent on Kernel version it is the same for both
> .38-rc4 and .37. I was just lucky with .37 more.
>
> And the same things happen with raid456 module. I do
> []$ modprobe raid456; modprobe --remove raid456
> A few times it loads, printing the above checks, Then At one
> time it freezes. Sometimes at first attempt sometimes at 4-7
> attempts. I never went 10 times strait.
>
> When it freezes (hard) I can see in my host that the UML is
> at 100% CPU.
>
> BTW: when I manage to pass the tests I get the above numbers
> But when I load directly on the host I get:
>
> xor: automatically using best checksumming function: generic_sse
> generic_sse: 7596.000 MB/sec
> xor: using function: generic_sse (7596.000 MB/sec)
> raid6: int64x1 1660 MB/s
> raid6: int64x2 1832 MB/s
> raid6: int64x4 1566 MB/s
> raid6: int64x8 1175 MB/s
> raid6: sse2x1 3699 MB/s
> raid6: sse2x2 4398 MB/s
> raid6: sse2x4 5863 MB/s
> raid6: using algorithm sse2x4 (5863 MB/s)
>
> and on the UML:
>
> raid6: int64x1 2019 MB/s
> raid6: int64x2 2208 MB/s
> raid6: int64x4 1892 MB/s
> raid6: int64x8 1528 MB/s
> raid6: using algorithm int64x2 (2208 MB/s)
> xor: measuring software checksum speed
> 8regs : 11308.000 MB/sec
> 8regs_prefetch: 9795.600 MB/sec
> 32regs : 11236.000 MB/sec
> 32regs_prefetch: 9752.400 MB/sec
> xor: using function: 8regs (11308.000 MB/sec)
>
> So the raid6 sse is better, but comparing it64xX the UML is faster than host
> But raid5? that's 33% better results. Does that say that UML's clock has
> a bug?
>
> Any way I'm trying to debug that xor.ko loading problem see what
> comes up. Any help is welcome
Hmmm, can you bisect it?
Can you post you config then I can also try my best...
> Thanks
> Boaz
>
>> the UML is completely frozen. When I kill the uml from the host
>> I can sometimes get this trace.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>> 750c7498: [<6005f936>] bad_page+0xd8/0xf3
>> 750c74c8: [<60060c93>] get_page_from_freelist+0x333/0x47b
>> 750c7508: [<60131243>] put_dec+0x20/0x3c
>> 750c75a0: [<6001a0ac>] change_pre_exec+0x0/0x24
>> 750c75b8: [<60060ef1>] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x116/0x65b
>> 750c7668: [<60132e25>] sprintf+0xa1/0xa3
>> 750c76a0: [<6001a0ac>] change_pre_exec+0x0/0x24
>> 750c76b8: [<60061446>] __get_free_pages+0x10/0x43
>> 750c76c8: [<60012875>] alloc_stack+0x1b/0x1d
>> 750c76d8: [<6001fe27>] run_helper+0x26/0x1b5
>> 750c76e8: [<60021553>] set_signals+0x1c/0x2e
>> 750c7708: [<6007efac>] __kmalloc+0x9e/0xc4
>> 750c7748: [<6001a544>] change+0x124/0x189
>> 750c77e8: [<601b77db>] _raw_spin_unlock+0x9/0xb
>> 750c7818: [<6001a5a9>] close_addr+0x0/0x1c
>> 750c7828: [<6001a5c3>] close_addr+0x1a/0x1c
>> 750c7838: [<6001926a>] iter_addresses+0x5f/0x76
>> 750c7858: [<6007e8e8>] kfree+0x92/0x9b
>> 750c7898: [<60022d01>] tuntap_close+0x24/0x38
>> 750c78b8: [<600194e4>] close_devices+0x4a/0x7f
>> 750c78d8: [<600121bf>] do_uml_exitcalls+0x12/0x23
>> 750c78f8: [<60012cd2>] uml_cleanup+0x1a/0x87
>> 750c7928: [<6002039b>] last_ditch_exit+0x9/0x16
>> 750c79e8: [<78817031>] xor_8regs_2+0x31/0x58 [xor]
>> 750c7a18: [<7881b000>] calibrate_xor_blocks+0x0/0xdf [xor]
>> 750c7aa8: [<601b77ce>] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x18/0x1c
>> 750c7ac8: [<60029d8d>] try_to_wake_up+0x86/0x98
>> 750c7d78: [<601b548d>] printk+0xa0/0xa3
>> 750c7e08: [<78817633>] do_xor_speed+0x54/0xaf [xor]
>> 750c7e20: [<7881b000>] calibrate_xor_blocks+0x0/0xdf [xor]
>> 750c7e58: [<7881b057>] calibrate_xor_blocks+0x57/0xdf [xor]
>> 750c7e68: [<7881b000>] calibrate_xor_blocks+0x0/0xdf [xor]
>> 750c7e78: [<6001105a>] do_one_initcall+0x76/0x121
>> 750c7eb8: [<600563fd>] sys_init_module+0x78/0x1a6
>> 750c7ee8: [<60014d60>] handle_syscall+0x58/0x70
>> 750c7f08: [<60024163>] userspace+0x2dd/0x38a
>> 750c7fc8: [<600126af>] fork_handler+0x62/0x69
>>
>> (gdb) list *(xor_8regs_2+0x31)
>> 0x55 is in xor_8regs_2
>> (/usr0/export/dev/bharrosh/git/pub/scsi-misc/include/asm-generic/xor.h:29).
>> 24 p1[0] ^= p2[0];
>> 25 p1[1] ^= p2[1];
>> 26 p1[2] ^= p2[2];
>> 27 p1[3] ^= p2[3];
>> 28 p1[4] ^= p2[4];
>> 29 p1[5] ^= p2[5];
>> 30 p1[6] ^= p2[6];
>> 31 p1[7] ^= p2[7];
>> 32 p1 += 8;
>> 33 p2 += 8;
>> (gdb) list *(calibrate_xor_blocks+0x0)
>> 0xd52 is in calibrate_xor_blocks
>> (/usr0/export/dev/bharrosh/git/pub/scsi-misc/crypto/xor.c:101).
>> 96 speed / 1000, speed % 1000);
>> 97 }
>> 98
>> 99 static int __init
>> 100 calibrate_xor_blocks(void)
>> 101 {
>> 102 void *b1, *b2;
>> 103 struct xor_block_template *f, *fastest;
>> 104
>> 105 /*
>> (gdb) list *(do_xor_speed+0x54)
>> 0x657 is in do_xor_speed
>> (/usr0/export/dev/bharrosh/git/pub/scsi-misc/crypto/xor.c:84).
>> 79 now = jiffies;
>> 80 count = 0;
>> 81 while (jiffies == now) {
>> 82 mb(); /* prevent loop optimzation */
>> 83 tmpl->do_2(BENCH_SIZE, b1, b2);
>> 84 mb();
>> 85 count++;
>> 86 mb();
>> 87 }
>> 88 if (count > max)
>> (gdb) list *(calibrate_xor_blocks+0x57)
>> 0xda9 is in calibrate_xor_blocks
>> (/usr0/export/dev/bharrosh/git/pub/scsi-misc/crypto/xor.c:137).
>> 132 "checksumming function: %s\n",
>> 133 fastest->name);
>> 134 xor_speed(fastest);
>> 135 } else {
>> 136 printk(KERN_INFO "xor: measuring software checksum
>> speed\n");
>> 137 XOR_TRY_TEMPLATES;
>> 138 fastest = template_list;
>> 139 for (f = fastest; f; f = f->next)
>> 140 if (f->speed > fastest->speed)
>> 141 fastest = f;
>> (gdb) q
>>
>> So it looks like the code in UML links the include/asm-generic/xor.h and
>> that it gets
>> stuck. Any thing changed in this area in last merge window?
>>
>> Before I start the very difficult bisect?
>>
>> Thanks for any tips
>> Boaz
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
>> the body of a message to [email protected]
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
--
Thanks,
//richard
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ultimate all-in-one performance toolkit: Intel(R) Parallel Studio XE:
Pinpoint memory and threading errors before they happen.
Find and fix more than 250 security defects in the development cycle.
Locate bottlenecks in serial and parallel code that limit performance.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devfeb
_______________________________________________
User-mode-linux-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
